A few weeks ago, I posted some information on an X band radar system being built in Corpus Christi Texas, for the American ballistic missile defence program. The SBX consists of an X band radar (Manufactured by Raytheon) and associated facilities being mounted on a semi-submersible platform originally designed for sea-bed oil drilling.
Well, apparently the mating of the topsides and rig have taken place, as this extremely brief story indicates.
Here's a more detailed version, datelined 05 Apr 05. It's actually the complete release from Raytheon as carried by a news release distribution service.
Rather than cut and paste the URL to the photo, here's the link. It's a mighty impressive thing.
18 April 2005
Tee minus whenever and holding
While the last Canaveral Titan mission (B-30) is on hold, it is apparently going to happen this week.
Since people are still hunting for information - my counter program tells me so) I thought I'd toss up some older but still curious stuff.
For example, this news story (datelined 08 Apr 05 - two days into the crisis) ledes with the oil companies being asked to evacuate by the rigs by government. An unidentified spokesperson for ExxonMobil" says that the rig kept producing as usual at that point, but that the company would comply with any order to evacuate.
Odd thing is that the Canada Newfoundland Offshore Petroleum Board release, issued on 07 Apr 05, says something a little bit different."The production operators HMDC and Petro-Canada informed the board of their plans to remove personnel, offload crude inventory and shut-in production over the weekend as a precautionary measure as debris from a rocket launch may fall within 15 nautical miles of the Hibernia platform. The drilling rig GSF Grand Banks will be towed out of the potential hazard zone."
The crisis story was picked up with varying degrees of accuracy by most of the major news services including Reuters and United Press International. Here's a UPI story, for example, that made the Washington Times. Here's one that made Agence France Press, albeit in English. Here's a Reuters one that was posted to DefenseNews.com.
Someone should find a decent-sized boat and sell tickets to spend the launch and impact time bobbing around near the platforms, just in case. At the very least there might be a decent light show as the sustainer falls into the ocean - likely up to 100 nautical miles away from the oilfields.
Since people are still hunting for information - my counter program tells me so) I thought I'd toss up some older but still curious stuff.
For example, this news story (datelined 08 Apr 05 - two days into the crisis) ledes with the oil companies being asked to evacuate by the rigs by government. An unidentified spokesperson for ExxonMobil" says that the rig kept producing as usual at that point, but that the company would comply with any order to evacuate.
Odd thing is that the Canada Newfoundland Offshore Petroleum Board release, issued on 07 Apr 05, says something a little bit different."The production operators HMDC and Petro-Canada informed the board of their plans to remove personnel, offload crude inventory and shut-in production over the weekend as a precautionary measure as debris from a rocket launch may fall within 15 nautical miles of the Hibernia platform. The drilling rig GSF Grand Banks will be towed out of the potential hazard zone."
The crisis story was picked up with varying degrees of accuracy by most of the major news services including Reuters and United Press International. Here's a UPI story, for example, that made the Washington Times. Here's one that made Agence France Press, albeit in English. Here's a Reuters one that was posted to DefenseNews.com.
Someone should find a decent-sized boat and sell tickets to spend the launch and impact time bobbing around near the platforms, just in case. At the very least there might be a decent light show as the sustainer falls into the ocean - likely up to 100 nautical miles away from the oilfields.
17 April 2005
Voice activated - Your scribe goes TV
For those who can access Rogers Cable community channels in Newfoundland and Labrador take a gander at their call-in show, Voice Activated, Sunday 17 April 2005, 8:30 PM to 9:30 PM (rebroadcast immediately following).
Here's the the e-mail from producer/host Greg Locke, with some minor editorial changes:
Aaahhhh, the game of politics.
The election drums are starting to beat in Ottawa. If Martin's Liberal government falls at the hands of the opposition parties before passing Bill C-43, Newfoundland and Labrador will be without its new accord deal and the two billion dollars it thought it had for last month's budget.
The Liberals and the Conservatives are playing a game of chicken and its Newfoundland and Labrador that is the deer caught in the headlights.
Who does your MP represent?
Where do we fit into the Canadian Confederation?
Tactics, strategy and flanking maneuvers, we'll talk about our great game and how Newfoundland and Labrador will fare when the dust settles.
Joining us for this discussion will be:
James McGrath, a former Progressive Conservative member of parliament, Federal fisheries minister in Joe Clark's government and a former lieutenant governor of Newfoundland and Labrador.
Nancy Riche, long time NDPer and labour organizer. She was the secretary-treasurer and executive vice president of the Canadian Labour Congress representing 2.3 million members across Canada.
Ed Hollett, principal of Gryphon Public Affairs, a public policy consulting firm in St. John's. Ed was also special assistant to Premier Clyde Wells from 1989-1996.
It's a call-in show and who the hell wants the three of us blathering for an hour all by ourselves?
Here's the the e-mail from producer/host Greg Locke, with some minor editorial changes:
Aaahhhh, the game of politics.
The election drums are starting to beat in Ottawa. If Martin's Liberal government falls at the hands of the opposition parties before passing Bill C-43, Newfoundland and Labrador will be without its new accord deal and the two billion dollars it thought it had for last month's budget.
The Liberals and the Conservatives are playing a game of chicken and its Newfoundland and Labrador that is the deer caught in the headlights.
Who does your MP represent?
Where do we fit into the Canadian Confederation?
Tactics, strategy and flanking maneuvers, we'll talk about our great game and how Newfoundland and Labrador will fare when the dust settles.
Joining us for this discussion will be:
James McGrath, a former Progressive Conservative member of parliament, Federal fisheries minister in Joe Clark's government and a former lieutenant governor of Newfoundland and Labrador.
Nancy Riche, long time NDPer and labour organizer. She was the secretary-treasurer and executive vice president of the Canadian Labour Congress representing 2.3 million members across Canada.
Ed Hollett, principal of Gryphon Public Affairs, a public policy consulting firm in St. John's. Ed was also special assistant to Premier Clyde Wells from 1989-1996.
-30-
Break out the popcorn and get on the telephone.It's a call-in show and who the hell wants the three of us blathering for an hour all by ourselves?
16 April 2005
Does there have to be an election?
In the simplest answer, no there doesn't have to be an election just because a minority government loses a vote of confidence..
At least, not in the British parliamentary tradition which Canada follows there doesn't.
If Stephen Harper's personal ambition gets the better of him very soon, he may think he is forcing an election to win a majority government, but he might not be. I say personal ambition by the way because Canadians do say two things in every single poll taken recently: one - they think Paul Martin is a better PM than Harper and two - they don't want an election by a huge margin.
In a minority parliament, indeed in any parliament, the Governor General may ask the leader of any party in the House to see if he or she can find its confidence. By custom, next in line after Martin would Harper.
So If the government is defeated soon on a budget bill or confidence motion, young Mr. Harper may find himself on the way to Rideau Hall with the offer he wants: form a government.
What to do?
Well according CTV this morning, Harper things that idea is a bit unlikely. "Asked about this prospect Friday, Harper sounded dubious. "That would be feasible only under extraordinary circumstances," he told reporters.
That scenario, says [CTV Ottawa bureau chief Robert] Fife, is "not very likely given the poll numbers -- I think the answer would be a resounding no."
The poll numbers have nothing to do with it, Bob. And if they did, they would support a Harper minority as easily as anything else. The public may wish for a changed of administration without going through the expense of an election. In the current setting they can have that. Have it, that is, if Mr. Harper and his Conservatives are actually democratic enough to follow the will of the people.
See that's the underlying thing about Stephen Harper, the academic/intellectual cum political leader. He isn't really a democrat. He's an elitist. When he says that he has to prop up this government until the people want something else, what he means is this: I'll stay here until you people get the point that I want to be PM with a majority government. He means he'll hang around until the rest of us agree with his opinion. In the meantime, he and the media will bombard everyone with speculation about the imminent fall of the government and the election that must follow.
Problem is, both the media and Harper have it dead wrong.
Martin and the Liberals may get defeated in the House.
But that doesn't mean an automatic election.
Nope.
Maybe the experience of being a minority PM would help Harper's perspective. Canadians have already given him his marching orders and they keep doing it in opinion polls: stop shagging around Steve and learn to play well with others.
We don't really care that you want a majority government. You're supposed to be in Ottawa passing legislation rather than in Cambridge learning how to press shirts in some dorky campaign photo-op.
Democracy isn't real about what you want, Steve.
It's about what the voters want.
and, as Preston Manning reminded you once, that's because it's our money.
Democracy, like payback, can be a mother, Steve.
Suck it up and get down to work.
Oh yeah:
Easy on the starch.
At least, not in the British parliamentary tradition which Canada follows there doesn't.
If Stephen Harper's personal ambition gets the better of him very soon, he may think he is forcing an election to win a majority government, but he might not be. I say personal ambition by the way because Canadians do say two things in every single poll taken recently: one - they think Paul Martin is a better PM than Harper and two - they don't want an election by a huge margin.
In a minority parliament, indeed in any parliament, the Governor General may ask the leader of any party in the House to see if he or she can find its confidence. By custom, next in line after Martin would Harper.
So If the government is defeated soon on a budget bill or confidence motion, young Mr. Harper may find himself on the way to Rideau Hall with the offer he wants: form a government.
What to do?
Well according CTV this morning, Harper things that idea is a bit unlikely. "Asked about this prospect Friday, Harper sounded dubious. "That would be feasible only under extraordinary circumstances," he told reporters.
That scenario, says [CTV Ottawa bureau chief Robert] Fife, is "not very likely given the poll numbers -- I think the answer would be a resounding no."
The poll numbers have nothing to do with it, Bob. And if they did, they would support a Harper minority as easily as anything else. The public may wish for a changed of administration without going through the expense of an election. In the current setting they can have that. Have it, that is, if Mr. Harper and his Conservatives are actually democratic enough to follow the will of the people.
See that's the underlying thing about Stephen Harper, the academic/intellectual cum political leader. He isn't really a democrat. He's an elitist. When he says that he has to prop up this government until the people want something else, what he means is this: I'll stay here until you people get the point that I want to be PM with a majority government. He means he'll hang around until the rest of us agree with his opinion. In the meantime, he and the media will bombard everyone with speculation about the imminent fall of the government and the election that must follow.
Problem is, both the media and Harper have it dead wrong.
Martin and the Liberals may get defeated in the House.
But that doesn't mean an automatic election.
Nope.
Maybe the experience of being a minority PM would help Harper's perspective. Canadians have already given him his marching orders and they keep doing it in opinion polls: stop shagging around Steve and learn to play well with others.
We don't really care that you want a majority government. You're supposed to be in Ottawa passing legislation rather than in Cambridge learning how to press shirts in some dorky campaign photo-op.
Democracy isn't real about what you want, Steve.
It's about what the voters want.
and, as Preston Manning reminded you once, that's because it's our money.
Democracy, like payback, can be a mother, Steve.
Suck it up and get down to work.
Oh yeah:
Easy on the starch.
15 April 2005
Is Loyola Hearn changing seats?
It's always entertaining when Loyola Hearn, the absentee member of parliament for St. John's South-Mount Pearl speaks up for his constituents.
VOCM has him this evening complaining about plans to close 86 rural post offices in Newfoundland and Labrador.
1. What are the odds that none of the post offices on the list are in his riding?
2. What are the odds some of the offices on the list are close to his home in Renews, about two hours drive south of his riding?
3. What are the odds that most of the post offices on the list are ones where the population it serves has dropped dramatically such that there is less of a demand for service or that there might be other ways to deliver mail and keep up the level of service without an actual Canada Post postal office?
4. What are the odds says Loyola is pumping this one because there is a rumour of an election?
But here's one that is a 100% guarantee:
Loyola Hearn isn't jumping up and down to get his own party to vote for millions of dollars in cash for the cities and the people that actually are in his current riding.
So therefore, I ask:
5. What are the odds Loyola won't be standing for election in St. John's South-Mount Pearl in the next federal election?
VOCM has him this evening complaining about plans to close 86 rural post offices in Newfoundland and Labrador.
1. What are the odds that none of the post offices on the list are in his riding?
2. What are the odds some of the offices on the list are close to his home in Renews, about two hours drive south of his riding?
3. What are the odds that most of the post offices on the list are ones where the population it serves has dropped dramatically such that there is less of a demand for service or that there might be other ways to deliver mail and keep up the level of service without an actual Canada Post postal office?
4. What are the odds says Loyola is pumping this one because there is a rumour of an election?
But here's one that is a 100% guarantee:
Loyola Hearn isn't jumping up and down to get his own party to vote for millions of dollars in cash for the cities and the people that actually are in his current riding.
So therefore, I ask:
5. What are the odds Loyola won't be standing for election in St. John's South-Mount Pearl in the next federal election?
Rocket Man - The Movie and other loose ends
Ironic given the recent flap, Newfoundland and Labrador has played a key role in Titan missile launches from Florida through a communications relay point in Argentia. The site was built in 1993 and continues operation as part of the Florida missile launch complex's range instrumentation system.
That system allows continuous communications with the launch vehicle. In the event of any problems with the launch, data from Argentia would allow the launch controllers to make a decision about destroying the rocket and payload.
and now for the trivia...
Ok, so maybe some of you are growing tired of the whole Titan 4B launch story, but as a guy who grew up when men on rockets were going to the moon, there is something about the whole thing that still captures my imagination.
The movie: Here is a link to NASA and some footage (no audio) in mpg format from the night launch of the Cassini probe. This launch used a Titan 4B and it is damned impressive. For those who may have missed it, the B-30 mission that caused such a fuss here this past week will be a night launch.
Note especially that towards the end of this clip, there is a bit of a flash. That is the solid fuel boosters separating a mere two minutes into the flight, on schedule. They drop back to the ocean. The payload is then taken to orbit by the sustainer, a liquid fueled vehicle based on the old Titan intercontinental ballistic missile.
The impact: I still haven't been able to confirm whether or not that sustainer breaks up on re-entry or lands intact. One source I'd trust has it that the thing comes down in one piece. That's actually better than bits and pieces, since there is an even higher level of confidence in where one big piece will go, as opposed to a bunch of little ones.
Personally, in that scenario, I'd still think there is almost no chance of any kind of explosion form whatever fuel remains on board, if any.
Tracking ships and launch monitoring: Having invested a lot of money into the rockets and the payloads, and as part of an overall monitoring system, the United States operates a number of missile tracking ships in the Atlantic and Pacific that spend their time down range during a launch gathering data. They feed back to the launch control centre so that there is never a time when the launch authorities don't know what is going on. It's part of the overall safety program to ensure launches are safe and that in the event of a problem, accurate information is flowing back to Florida in case the rocket must be destroyed in flight.
Here's one link. Scroll down to see all the vessel types. If memory serves, Observation Island was one of the ships I visited in the early 80s when it and another vessel, the Range Sentinel, were open to public tours during a port call.
Here's a link that discusses revitalization of launch facilities in Florida. "The USNS Redstone was deactivated on 6 August 1993, but a new range site was completed in Argentia, Newfoundland in June 1993 to support northbound flights of the TITAN IV from Cape Canaveral." [Emphasis added]
I'll have to check to see if this site is still active. Have a read through this history though; it gives tons of useful information on operations at Canaveral including range monitoring.
I also found a Powerpoint presentation from the late 1990s on command and control issues related to re-invigoration of the Canaveral launch complexes. It includes a prominent mention of Argentia and the so-called high-inclination launches. US NAVFAC Argentia closed in the early 1990s so odds are high as I write this that the Titan related site remained active for some time afterward and may still be there working busily away.
Update:
Further searching turned up the name of a company that provides communications support to Canaveral under contract. It's current corporate information package includes work at a site in Argentina, Newfoundland.
Just for the heck of it, here's a link to photos of the Island and a tiny bit of Labrador taken from STS-96. Kinda hard not to get a little awestruck at the beauty of the Earth from space. I feel a Tom Hanks moment coming on our voyage from the Earth to the moon.
If anyone out there is old enough to remember, there used to be a tracking and communications station at Shoe Cove used for the Apollo and Apollo-Soyuz programs in the 1970s. There's not much left but here is a link to some pictures of the Shoe Cove site as it stood recently.
That system allows continuous communications with the launch vehicle. In the event of any problems with the launch, data from Argentia would allow the launch controllers to make a decision about destroying the rocket and payload.
and now for the trivia...
Ok, so maybe some of you are growing tired of the whole Titan 4B launch story, but as a guy who grew up when men on rockets were going to the moon, there is something about the whole thing that still captures my imagination.
The movie: Here is a link to NASA and some footage (no audio) in mpg format from the night launch of the Cassini probe. This launch used a Titan 4B and it is damned impressive. For those who may have missed it, the B-30 mission that caused such a fuss here this past week will be a night launch.
Note especially that towards the end of this clip, there is a bit of a flash. That is the solid fuel boosters separating a mere two minutes into the flight, on schedule. They drop back to the ocean. The payload is then taken to orbit by the sustainer, a liquid fueled vehicle based on the old Titan intercontinental ballistic missile.
The impact: I still haven't been able to confirm whether or not that sustainer breaks up on re-entry or lands intact. One source I'd trust has it that the thing comes down in one piece. That's actually better than bits and pieces, since there is an even higher level of confidence in where one big piece will go, as opposed to a bunch of little ones.
Personally, in that scenario, I'd still think there is almost no chance of any kind of explosion form whatever fuel remains on board, if any.
Tracking ships and launch monitoring: Having invested a lot of money into the rockets and the payloads, and as part of an overall monitoring system, the United States operates a number of missile tracking ships in the Atlantic and Pacific that spend their time down range during a launch gathering data. They feed back to the launch control centre so that there is never a time when the launch authorities don't know what is going on. It's part of the overall safety program to ensure launches are safe and that in the event of a problem, accurate information is flowing back to Florida in case the rocket must be destroyed in flight.
Here's one link. Scroll down to see all the vessel types. If memory serves, Observation Island was one of the ships I visited in the early 80s when it and another vessel, the Range Sentinel, were open to public tours during a port call.
Here's a link that discusses revitalization of launch facilities in Florida. "The USNS Redstone was deactivated on 6 August 1993, but a new range site was completed in Argentia, Newfoundland in June 1993 to support northbound flights of the TITAN IV from Cape Canaveral." [Emphasis added]
I'll have to check to see if this site is still active. Have a read through this history though; it gives tons of useful information on operations at Canaveral including range monitoring.
I also found a Powerpoint presentation from the late 1990s on command and control issues related to re-invigoration of the Canaveral launch complexes. It includes a prominent mention of Argentia and the so-called high-inclination launches. US NAVFAC Argentia closed in the early 1990s so odds are high as I write this that the Titan related site remained active for some time afterward and may still be there working busily away.
Update:
Further searching turned up the name of a company that provides communications support to Canaveral under contract. It's current corporate information package includes work at a site in Argentina, Newfoundland.
Just for the heck of it, here's a link to photos of the Island and a tiny bit of Labrador taken from STS-96. Kinda hard not to get a little awestruck at the beauty of the Earth from space. I feel a Tom Hanks moment coming on our voyage from the Earth to the moon.
If anyone out there is old enough to remember, there used to be a tracking and communications station at Shoe Cove used for the Apollo and Apollo-Soyuz programs in the 1970s. There's not much left but here is a link to some pictures of the Shoe Cove site as it stood recently.
-30-
Revsied from 22:00 hrs, 14 Apr 05 with new lede and additional information.
Stephen Harper - closet Liberal
Lust for power does strange things to people.
Some become even more firm in their convictions.
Others, like Stephen Harper and the federal Conservatives, are prepared to abandon just about anything they once stood against just to get the keys to 24 Sussex.
Canadian Press is reporting and the local Telly has it on the front page. Harper and the Cons (sounds like a punk group - in Utah) have decided the Kyoto Accord is something they can get jiggy with. For those of you not interacting with 20 somethings and the younger set on a daily basis, that means they think Kyoto is peachy keen.
Only a few short weeks ago, Stephen, Blarney the Dinosaur (his Newfoundland lieutenant) and every other Con supporter were screaming that the Kyoto bits of Boll C-43 had to be separated from that big bill. That would let the Cons vote for the rest, including the new Equalization money from the offshore.
Now they love Kyoto.
And the Cons have decided that the offshore stuff now has to be split off from C-43 so they can vote for that. Without Kyoto stuff, all that's left is money for seniors, toddlers and of course Nova Scotia and this province.
Premier Danny Williams wants the offshore money bill passed quickly. Quickest way to pass it is the present form. What's the problem Stephen?
Well, it's really hard to know what the Cons really want - or really stand for - any more. They keep abandoning positions. At the Big Weekend, they just sat around and bored people to death. No one with an opinion was allowed to speak on anything of substance.
We can sort of figure out what they are against - individual human rights, for example.
And up until yesterday and the latest polls, they were opposed to environmental measures like Kyoto.
Hmmmmm.
I am starting to wonder if deep in his heart, Stephen Harper is really a Liberal. I bet he used to have PET pajamas with feet in 'em, kept the Collected Works of Louis St. Laurent by his teenage bedside and then later, when he was outwardly espousing radical economic philosophies he would go home every night and read 1970s budget speeches.
Conservatives used to attack Liberals for the maleability, for the willingness to stand for whatever was expedient, for whatever would win votes.
Well, those Conservatives are likely gobsmacked with the party they support these days.
Meanwhile, in southern Ontario today, Stephen Harper will be talking about how Ontario gets shafted by Ottawa and doesn't get a fair shake on Equalization or other federal transfers.
As I thumb through my copy of The Sayings and Wisdom of Brian Mulroney, I come across some reference to elderly practitioners of the oldest profession.
I concur, Brian. I concur wholeheartedly.
Some become even more firm in their convictions.
Others, like Stephen Harper and the federal Conservatives, are prepared to abandon just about anything they once stood against just to get the keys to 24 Sussex.
Canadian Press is reporting and the local Telly has it on the front page. Harper and the Cons (sounds like a punk group - in Utah) have decided the Kyoto Accord is something they can get jiggy with. For those of you not interacting with 20 somethings and the younger set on a daily basis, that means they think Kyoto is peachy keen.
Only a few short weeks ago, Stephen, Blarney the Dinosaur (his Newfoundland lieutenant) and every other Con supporter were screaming that the Kyoto bits of Boll C-43 had to be separated from that big bill. That would let the Cons vote for the rest, including the new Equalization money from the offshore.
Now they love Kyoto.
And the Cons have decided that the offshore stuff now has to be split off from C-43 so they can vote for that. Without Kyoto stuff, all that's left is money for seniors, toddlers and of course Nova Scotia and this province.
Premier Danny Williams wants the offshore money bill passed quickly. Quickest way to pass it is the present form. What's the problem Stephen?
Well, it's really hard to know what the Cons really want - or really stand for - any more. They keep abandoning positions. At the Big Weekend, they just sat around and bored people to death. No one with an opinion was allowed to speak on anything of substance.
We can sort of figure out what they are against - individual human rights, for example.
And up until yesterday and the latest polls, they were opposed to environmental measures like Kyoto.
Hmmmmm.
I am starting to wonder if deep in his heart, Stephen Harper is really a Liberal. I bet he used to have PET pajamas with feet in 'em, kept the Collected Works of Louis St. Laurent by his teenage bedside and then later, when he was outwardly espousing radical economic philosophies he would go home every night and read 1970s budget speeches.
Conservatives used to attack Liberals for the maleability, for the willingness to stand for whatever was expedient, for whatever would win votes.
Well, those Conservatives are likely gobsmacked with the party they support these days.
Meanwhile, in southern Ontario today, Stephen Harper will be talking about how Ontario gets shafted by Ottawa and doesn't get a fair shake on Equalization or other federal transfers.
As I thumb through my copy of The Sayings and Wisdom of Brian Mulroney, I come across some reference to elderly practitioners of the oldest profession.
I concur, Brian. I concur wholeheartedly.
14 April 2005
Explosive Poll results
Do please provide me with relief.
In other words, give me a frickin break.
The Mother Corp has joined the screaming poll brigade. Having exhausted the use of the word explosive when mentioning Gomery testimony, they now have a poll of their own courtesy of Environics, a respectable crowd of number-mashers.
The headline would have you believe that the responses to the poll "suggest" the sponsorship scandal is being the most important issue in the country. The lede says something along the lines.
Thankfully the webgoddess gave the question and actual response levels.
Look at the column in the margin.
Health care is the number one concern of Canadians by a seven point margin ahead of "poor leadership" at 14. The only way you can get Gomery in there is to take the number three choice - i.e. Gomery at 10 percent - add that to the second choice and vie-oh-la as Archie Bunker used to say.
Minor problem: "poor government/leadership" and the Gomery thing are not necessarily one and the same.
This is called creative re-interpretation of numbers by the CBC news staff to produce an answer the data doesn't actually support. Undoubtedly, they will protests that their lumping is somehow valid, but does that make it accurate?
We can't tell because CBC didn't see fit to give us either the actual survey instrument (questionnaire) or a link to Environics where the background info might be kept.
When I look at the results they released, I see health care is still the biggest issue out there, substantially ahead of all others. I also notice that most people surveyed don't see the need for an election - 41% - while 34% feel Gomery would be the justification for calling it.
Now your humble scribbler is going to give you a link to Environics' own poll and their own release, issued just a week ago.
Look closely at this one since you have figures to compare them to from previous surveys administered in the same way using the same survey questions.
One thing to notice is that the "no reason for election response" has dropped a mere seven points in the CBC poll from the one Environics did about a week and a bit ago. That's hardly a catastrophic drop.
But if you really want to put their numbers in perspective look at the "sampling precision". By region it could be off by as much as nine percent in some provinces and is off by over six percent in Atlantic Canada.
Personally, I think this is the kind of polling that Diefenbaker had in mind when he made the crack about dogs.
Lemme go have a look at SES and see what they have to say.
More to follow.
In other words, give me a frickin break.
The Mother Corp has joined the screaming poll brigade. Having exhausted the use of the word explosive when mentioning Gomery testimony, they now have a poll of their own courtesy of Environics, a respectable crowd of number-mashers.
The headline would have you believe that the responses to the poll "suggest" the sponsorship scandal is being the most important issue in the country. The lede says something along the lines.
Thankfully the webgoddess gave the question and actual response levels.
Look at the column in the margin.
Health care is the number one concern of Canadians by a seven point margin ahead of "poor leadership" at 14. The only way you can get Gomery in there is to take the number three choice - i.e. Gomery at 10 percent - add that to the second choice and vie-oh-la as Archie Bunker used to say.
Minor problem: "poor government/leadership" and the Gomery thing are not necessarily one and the same.
This is called creative re-interpretation of numbers by the CBC news staff to produce an answer the data doesn't actually support. Undoubtedly, they will protests that their lumping is somehow valid, but does that make it accurate?
We can't tell because CBC didn't see fit to give us either the actual survey instrument (questionnaire) or a link to Environics where the background info might be kept.
When I look at the results they released, I see health care is still the biggest issue out there, substantially ahead of all others. I also notice that most people surveyed don't see the need for an election - 41% - while 34% feel Gomery would be the justification for calling it.
Now your humble scribbler is going to give you a link to Environics' own poll and their own release, issued just a week ago.
Look closely at this one since you have figures to compare them to from previous surveys administered in the same way using the same survey questions.
One thing to notice is that the "no reason for election response" has dropped a mere seven points in the CBC poll from the one Environics did about a week and a bit ago. That's hardly a catastrophic drop.
But if you really want to put their numbers in perspective look at the "sampling precision". By region it could be off by as much as nine percent in some provinces and is off by over six percent in Atlantic Canada.
Personally, I think this is the kind of polling that Diefenbaker had in mind when he made the crack about dogs.
Lemme go have a look at SES and see what they have to say.
More to follow.
Will we throw him a party?
As I keep hunting for places that carry Canadian Press releases for free, I found one here, courtesy of a link from Paul Wells' blog.
The story is about a former Joint Task Force 2 soldier who disappeared without a trace 21 months ago, only to turn up in Bangkok the other day at the Canadian Embassy there.
JTF 2 is an armed forces unit that specializes in counter-insurgency/anti-guerrilla warfare, anti-terror operations and the like. The Chretienites may have killed off the Canadian Airborne Regiment as a crisis management tactic, but we got back tons more capability in a unit of about the same size. Chretien can claim no credit for that silk purse from the sow's ear of the disbandment.
But I digress.
The point of this story that caught my eye was the fact the soldier was a demolitions expert who had years of training, operational experience and a laptop full of "how-to's_ when he went missing.
That and then the sort of low key way somebody from National Defence commented on it. To paraphrase: "While we still try to figure out what happened, we are just happy the guy is alive and safe in the arms of his family. We were kinda curious when he ran off, and we looked around for him for a while but hey, these things happen."
The Canadian Forces released the guy from the service in 2004, long before they knew what had become of him.
I am wondering why?
In other armies, deserters who are caught are treated like they should be: trial and jail. Desertion is a pretty serious offence and for one of Canada's best soldiers to do a runner like this is deeply troubling.
Why not just keep him in uniform and then throw the book at him when he comes back?
Maybe some JAG lawyer out there can fill me in a bit more on the techie issues. Being the good bureaucrats we are, Canadians probably got the guy off the books to keep him from building up pensionable time or something like that, hoping they could still throw him in jail if he showed up.
Then again, a guy who forced his way onto the bridge of an HMC ship with a loaded weapon wasn't charged with mutiny.
This is a story to keep track of.
The story is about a former Joint Task Force 2 soldier who disappeared without a trace 21 months ago, only to turn up in Bangkok the other day at the Canadian Embassy there.
JTF 2 is an armed forces unit that specializes in counter-insurgency/anti-guerrilla warfare, anti-terror operations and the like. The Chretienites may have killed off the Canadian Airborne Regiment as a crisis management tactic, but we got back tons more capability in a unit of about the same size. Chretien can claim no credit for that silk purse from the sow's ear of the disbandment.
But I digress.
The point of this story that caught my eye was the fact the soldier was a demolitions expert who had years of training, operational experience and a laptop full of "how-to's_ when he went missing.
That and then the sort of low key way somebody from National Defence commented on it. To paraphrase: "While we still try to figure out what happened, we are just happy the guy is alive and safe in the arms of his family. We were kinda curious when he ran off, and we looked around for him for a while but hey, these things happen."
The Canadian Forces released the guy from the service in 2004, long before they knew what had become of him.
I am wondering why?
In other armies, deserters who are caught are treated like they should be: trial and jail. Desertion is a pretty serious offence and for one of Canada's best soldiers to do a runner like this is deeply troubling.
Why not just keep him in uniform and then throw the book at him when he comes back?
Maybe some JAG lawyer out there can fill me in a bit more on the techie issues. Being the good bureaucrats we are, Canadians probably got the guy off the books to keep him from building up pensionable time or something like that, hoping they could still throw him in jail if he showed up.
Then again, a guy who forced his way onto the bridge of an HMC ship with a loaded weapon wasn't charged with mutiny.
This is a story to keep track of.
It only took a week - time for a public security advisor on the Hill
News this morning that the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, the offshore regulatory board and the oil companies have finally gathered enough information to go back to their regular jobs and stop panicking over the launch of an American rocket from Cape Canaveral.
Having spent now a total of 25 years dealing with defence and security issues both as part of my undergraduate and graduate studies and my work life, I'd draw everyone away from the cheap and easy conclusions here.
The simple fact remains that defence- and security- issues are on the provincial government's agenda on a daily basis. Historically, the provincial government has difficulty making accurate assessments of defence and security matters on its own - even though they can collect accurate information from a variety of sources. Instead, the government relies almost exclusively on getting things from Ottawa. That was one of the big problems in this instance.
In this instance, no threats were averted. There was no threat. It was a totally artificial crisis. But it does point to a fundamental problem in the province's ability to identify a crisis accurately, deploy resources and then address a crisis. This has nothing to do with this premier and this government: it is a chronic problem going back 25 years and more. I saw it during my time in the Tower.
For a case after my time, does anyone remember 9/11? While people have been busily patting themselves on the back, it was largely characterized by fumbles and some monumental gaffes. Some were minor; some, like actual physical security of the airport were serious. Some, like the silly spat with Ottawa over cots were based on exactly the sort of misinformation that led the Premier to go public in this instance, with predictable and avoidable responses.
Personally, I think it is time for government to undertake a public security review. There are at least three senior retired army generals from this province I can think of who would be available to take on the task. Other provinces did that sort of thing after 9/11.
Aside from anything they'd recommend, government needs to appoint a senior official as a direct advisor to the Premier on public safety and security, much like the new national security advisor to the Prime Minister. It's a specialist area; let's find someone who knows what they are talking about.
When there is another Titan booster scare, the security advisor can calm frayed nerves. By the same token, when something real happens, cabinet can be assured that they will be getting the most reliable information from the best sources, including their own. They can act with confidence in their information.
And it won't take a week to figure out something this simple. At the risk of prompting yet another couple of e-mails poking me, I will remind you that most of the basic questions the Premier asked were answered here either when he asked them or beforehand. When it came down to the self-destruct mechanism question yesterday, I actually threw up my hands in astonishment.
But hey. The fact is that readers of this blog had reliable, factual information on this booster from the get-go. Had I heard this story on Wednesday night - like government did - you would have rolled out of bed Thursday morning to a full briefing with your coffee. And you would have gone about your regular work-week unaffected by fear of things falling from the sky.
Note: This is actually a new posting, but I am including the text of one from yesterday in which I made some observations about this Titan episode. It is attached here since the two things are linked.
"Information levels up; anxiety levels down"
It was encouraging to see the Premier scrummed today expressing increasing comfort with the information he is getting about the upcoming Titan 4B launch on Sunday.
Over the past 24 hours or so, I have been getting a bit of clarity of my own on what the basic problem was. If there is any doubt or confusion from any earlier posts, let me try to put my conclusions as succinctly as possible.
1. It appears that neither the provincial government nor the oil companies noticed the number of rockets flying over the Grand Banks before.
2. Therefore, when information on this launch was handed to them, there was a legitimate and understandable "holy shit" reaction. Everybody here reacted as one would want them to react.
3. The Premier and others went searching for information, primarily from the federal government. Again, this is exactly what anyone would expect.
4. There is a limited or non-existent capability within the provincial government to make any independent assessments of defence- or security-related information that affect the province. I base this on my observations of this case and my knowledge of other cases from previous administrations going back 20 years. There is a systemic dependence on the feds. Yes, I know this is a federal area of responsibility but broader security issues like this are at least a joint responsibility.
5. The feds never really paid any attention to this launch for a variety of reasons. The simplest one is that officials at DND or Public Safety likely looked at the mission, calculated the risk and then decided there was no big deal here. They may have passed on the information to provincial Emergency Measures but it may have been flagged as "information purposes only", as opposed to "get ready to panic". Essentially, the federal interpretation of this event was the right one if they watched but didn't rush to action.
6. The Premier's ongoing frustration with this matter and his public comments stem for the basic lack of information he was getting. He either wasn't getting good briefings, what he was getting was crap, or he just didn't trust what he was hearing. Either way, he has a significant issue to deal with because...
7. The provincial government should be able to make some security-related assessments on its own using a variety of information sources. If the oil companies lacked information and were hopping up and down, the provincial government should have been able to calm them down somewhat. Then they could proceed to ask some focused, informed questions outside the glare of public scrutiny
8. If the Premier had received reliable information as early as Thursday, he may not have gone public as quickly as he did. As a consequence, he would have avoided putting everyone else on edge. Don't be surprised if the Americans were scared of law-suits. I noted that prospect days ago. As such they would become even more reluctant to share information, especially if they had any fear at all that a confidential briefing would be on CNN that night or the next day. Get lawyers involved: everyone's backside tightens.
9. On that basis it may well have been possible to defuse this matter as early as Saturday last week, i.e. 10 Apr 05, a mere three days after the initial scare.
10. As it is, the thing is finally settling down. I wouldn't be surprised if there was a decision taken to continue drilling as if nothing happened.
11. If anyone wants briefings on the launch licensing process for US rockets, the safety precautions and the international and domestic US legal issues, please let me know. I can easily deliver them to a group for an appropriate fee. After all that is one of the things I do for a living.
And yes, as you can expect me to say, just remember you read it here first.
Having spent now a total of 25 years dealing with defence and security issues both as part of my undergraduate and graduate studies and my work life, I'd draw everyone away from the cheap and easy conclusions here.
The simple fact remains that defence- and security- issues are on the provincial government's agenda on a daily basis. Historically, the provincial government has difficulty making accurate assessments of defence and security matters on its own - even though they can collect accurate information from a variety of sources. Instead, the government relies almost exclusively on getting things from Ottawa. That was one of the big problems in this instance.
In this instance, no threats were averted. There was no threat. It was a totally artificial crisis. But it does point to a fundamental problem in the province's ability to identify a crisis accurately, deploy resources and then address a crisis. This has nothing to do with this premier and this government: it is a chronic problem going back 25 years and more. I saw it during my time in the Tower.
For a case after my time, does anyone remember 9/11? While people have been busily patting themselves on the back, it was largely characterized by fumbles and some monumental gaffes. Some were minor; some, like actual physical security of the airport were serious. Some, like the silly spat with Ottawa over cots were based on exactly the sort of misinformation that led the Premier to go public in this instance, with predictable and avoidable responses.
Personally, I think it is time for government to undertake a public security review. There are at least three senior retired army generals from this province I can think of who would be available to take on the task. Other provinces did that sort of thing after 9/11.
Aside from anything they'd recommend, government needs to appoint a senior official as a direct advisor to the Premier on public safety and security, much like the new national security advisor to the Prime Minister. It's a specialist area; let's find someone who knows what they are talking about.
When there is another Titan booster scare, the security advisor can calm frayed nerves. By the same token, when something real happens, cabinet can be assured that they will be getting the most reliable information from the best sources, including their own. They can act with confidence in their information.
And it won't take a week to figure out something this simple. At the risk of prompting yet another couple of e-mails poking me, I will remind you that most of the basic questions the Premier asked were answered here either when he asked them or beforehand. When it came down to the self-destruct mechanism question yesterday, I actually threw up my hands in astonishment.
But hey. The fact is that readers of this blog had reliable, factual information on this booster from the get-go. Had I heard this story on Wednesday night - like government did - you would have rolled out of bed Thursday morning to a full briefing with your coffee. And you would have gone about your regular work-week unaffected by fear of things falling from the sky.
-30-
Note: This is actually a new posting, but I am including the text of one from yesterday in which I made some observations about this Titan episode. It is attached here since the two things are linked.
"Information levels up; anxiety levels down"
It was encouraging to see the Premier scrummed today expressing increasing comfort with the information he is getting about the upcoming Titan 4B launch on Sunday.
Over the past 24 hours or so, I have been getting a bit of clarity of my own on what the basic problem was. If there is any doubt or confusion from any earlier posts, let me try to put my conclusions as succinctly as possible.
1. It appears that neither the provincial government nor the oil companies noticed the number of rockets flying over the Grand Banks before.
2. Therefore, when information on this launch was handed to them, there was a legitimate and understandable "holy shit" reaction. Everybody here reacted as one would want them to react.
3. The Premier and others went searching for information, primarily from the federal government. Again, this is exactly what anyone would expect.
4. There is a limited or non-existent capability within the provincial government to make any independent assessments of defence- or security-related information that affect the province. I base this on my observations of this case and my knowledge of other cases from previous administrations going back 20 years. There is a systemic dependence on the feds. Yes, I know this is a federal area of responsibility but broader security issues like this are at least a joint responsibility.
5. The feds never really paid any attention to this launch for a variety of reasons. The simplest one is that officials at DND or Public Safety likely looked at the mission, calculated the risk and then decided there was no big deal here. They may have passed on the information to provincial Emergency Measures but it may have been flagged as "information purposes only", as opposed to "get ready to panic". Essentially, the federal interpretation of this event was the right one if they watched but didn't rush to action.
6. The Premier's ongoing frustration with this matter and his public comments stem for the basic lack of information he was getting. He either wasn't getting good briefings, what he was getting was crap, or he just didn't trust what he was hearing. Either way, he has a significant issue to deal with because...
7. The provincial government should be able to make some security-related assessments on its own using a variety of information sources. If the oil companies lacked information and were hopping up and down, the provincial government should have been able to calm them down somewhat. Then they could proceed to ask some focused, informed questions outside the glare of public scrutiny
8. If the Premier had received reliable information as early as Thursday, he may not have gone public as quickly as he did. As a consequence, he would have avoided putting everyone else on edge. Don't be surprised if the Americans were scared of law-suits. I noted that prospect days ago. As such they would become even more reluctant to share information, especially if they had any fear at all that a confidential briefing would be on CNN that night or the next day. Get lawyers involved: everyone's backside tightens.
9. On that basis it may well have been possible to defuse this matter as early as Saturday last week, i.e. 10 Apr 05, a mere three days after the initial scare.
10. As it is, the thing is finally settling down. I wouldn't be surprised if there was a decision taken to continue drilling as if nothing happened.
11. If anyone wants briefings on the launch licensing process for US rockets, the safety precautions and the international and domestic US legal issues, please let me know. I can easily deliver them to a group for an appropriate fee. After all that is one of the things I do for a living.
And yes, as you can expect me to say, just remember you read it here first.
13 April 2005
The bombs or bubbles bursting...
Two, count 'em two, comments this evening on my "you read it here first".
The first from a friend who reads these scribbles regularly at work - it's ok, it's apparently part of her job. She cautioned I shouldn't get too carried away with that idea.
A nod of the head in gratitude for that humbling reminder of my mortality.
And then there was the second one, the kick in the pants that finished the job.
Greg Locke, lately of Out of the Fog and Voice Activated at Rogers, and a guy who I have known for way too long, sent me an e-mail this evening. He advises that the Anna Nicole story was on OOTF last Wednesday night fully 24 hours before my posting.
Ok. Fine.
Point taken.
The first from a friend who reads these scribbles regularly at work - it's ok, it's apparently part of her job. She cautioned I shouldn't get too carried away with that idea.
A nod of the head in gratitude for that humbling reminder of my mortality.
And then there was the second one, the kick in the pants that finished the job.
Greg Locke, lately of Out of the Fog and Voice Activated at Rogers, and a guy who I have known for way too long, sent me an e-mail this evening. He advises that the Anna Nicole story was on OOTF last Wednesday night fully 24 hours before my posting.
Ok. Fine.
Point taken.
STS over the Grand Banks - belated math
For those who have been following this issue of rockets over the Grand Banks, here's a quick calculation of the space shuttle launches that have overflown the Grand Banks on the way to orbit.
That is, here are the numbers for the launches on an inclination between 51 degrees and 57 degrees.
It's 54. That includes every single one of the launches from 1981 until the Texas crash as well as the first one due in a couple of months, out to the ones on the planning books that haven't been finalized yet.
1. That's 54 out of 118 (by my count) or a total of 45.7%. Almost half the shuttle launches fly over the Grand Banks on launch. I am not including Titan, Atlas and Delta launches nor am I including any strictly military/naval ICBM or SLBM flights although I believe the latter ones tend to come from Vandenberg these days.
2. Number of incidents on launch in which the vehicle suffered a catastrophic failure: 1. The debris and the remains of the unfortunate crew landed in waters of Florida.
3. Number of catastrophic failures on re-entry: 1. Debris landed from California to eastern Texas.
4. Number of human casualties on the ground resulting from shuttle losses, excluding crew: ZERO.
Again, I am amazed that this information is in the public domain and yet people have been hopping up and down like this launch was the first one ever.
That is, here are the numbers for the launches on an inclination between 51 degrees and 57 degrees.
It's 54. That includes every single one of the launches from 1981 until the Texas crash as well as the first one due in a couple of months, out to the ones on the planning books that haven't been finalized yet.
1. That's 54 out of 118 (by my count) or a total of 45.7%. Almost half the shuttle launches fly over the Grand Banks on launch. I am not including Titan, Atlas and Delta launches nor am I including any strictly military/naval ICBM or SLBM flights although I believe the latter ones tend to come from Vandenberg these days.
2. Number of incidents on launch in which the vehicle suffered a catastrophic failure: 1. The debris and the remains of the unfortunate crew landed in waters of Florida.
3. Number of catastrophic failures on re-entry: 1. Debris landed from California to eastern Texas.
4. Number of human casualties on the ground resulting from shuttle losses, excluding crew: ZERO.
Again, I am amazed that this information is in the public domain and yet people have been hopping up and down like this launch was the first one ever.
First in space, too!
Ok, is it just me or is there a pattern developing in the you read it here first department?
I haven't been keeping a close score on my "firsts" but this Anna Nicole thing made me start to wonder if I just see things before others do. I'll refrain from another silicone and size joke in the interests of good taste.
No, I am not psychic or delusional - they're the same thing.
Nope.
I just got up this morning and read this story from Canadian Press, filed by Dene Moore.
Ms. Moore has found some obscure guy in some other part of the universe to tell her what - wait for it - you read here from a guy who works across the street from her office.
"But such a move seems odd because it's not the first time rockets have been fired over the East Coast oilfields, says Marco Caceres, a senior space analyst for The Teal Group, a U.S. aerospace and defence consulting firm."
Teal Group is a market intelligence firm - meaning they provide analysis to clients of a variety of issues in several aspects, like political, military, financial and social.
For the record, "market" intelligence is like any other form of intelligence. It requires gathering and then analyzing. In a simple sense what you have been getting in these pages is local intelligence analysis although not as detailed as my clients get.
See, cause that's the funny thing - one of the areas in which I practice is intelligence (information) and analysis. And, given my academic and military background, I do defence work.
So I'll be wandering across the street today to make sure that Dene is reading my blog.
She might actually get more information closer to home.
But you know, you read it here first.
I haven't been keeping a close score on my "firsts" but this Anna Nicole thing made me start to wonder if I just see things before others do. I'll refrain from another silicone and size joke in the interests of good taste.
No, I am not psychic or delusional - they're the same thing.
Nope.
I just got up this morning and read this story from Canadian Press, filed by Dene Moore.
Ms. Moore has found some obscure guy in some other part of the universe to tell her what - wait for it - you read here from a guy who works across the street from her office.
"But such a move seems odd because it's not the first time rockets have been fired over the East Coast oilfields, says Marco Caceres, a senior space analyst for The Teal Group, a U.S. aerospace and defence consulting firm."
Teal Group is a market intelligence firm - meaning they provide analysis to clients of a variety of issues in several aspects, like political, military, financial and social.
For the record, "market" intelligence is like any other form of intelligence. It requires gathering and then analyzing. In a simple sense what you have been getting in these pages is local intelligence analysis although not as detailed as my clients get.
See, cause that's the funny thing - one of the areas in which I practice is intelligence (information) and analysis. And, given my academic and military background, I do defence work.
So I'll be wandering across the street today to make sure that Dene is reading my blog.
She might actually get more information closer to home.
But you know, you read it here first.
12 April 2005
You saw the silicone here first
For those faithful readers of these scribbles, rest assured that you continue to read stuff here first.
Like the story that Anna Nicole was avoiding us because of her fear she might get shot while protesting the seal hunt.
News outlets in this province found the story over the past 24 hours.
Damien Penny, whose blog is otherwise timely, likewise only found it on Saturday past.
My version of the story ran here on April 7.
Robert Bond Papers - just a bit ahead of the curve.
Like the story that Anna Nicole was avoiding us because of her fear she might get shot while protesting the seal hunt.
News outlets in this province found the story over the past 24 hours.
Damien Penny, whose blog is otherwise timely, likewise only found it on Saturday past.
My version of the story ran here on April 7.
Robert Bond Papers - just a bit ahead of the curve.
It's fun until someone loses an eye
After saying he didn't like threats yesterday, in a completely different context, turns out that someone did threaten Danny Williams on Monday evening.
The Premier claims a group of four men an approached him as he tried to get into his car. One of them said words to the effect of "we'll get you".
Police are investigating and there may be charges.
Ok. Yesterday's threat was of disrupting the House of Assembly and threats against the Premier's political future, either implicit or explicit.
But like I said, threats have no place in politics.
Period.
Many years ago, there were threats uttered against another Premier. Some were the kind that gave you a cold sweat. Others were the kind of bluster we see all too often in politics.
One gizmo called into Nite Line back then and talked about how someone needed to push the then-Premier into a van and break his legs out somewhere in the woods. As I recall, the host - sometimes still on the air, unfortunately, - was egging callers on and said absolutely nothing - not a word - to denounce that kind of talk.
Like I said, threats have no place in civilized society.
Same goes for the morons who encourage them one way or another.
The Premier claims a group of four men an approached him as he tried to get into his car. One of them said words to the effect of "we'll get you".
Police are investigating and there may be charges.
Ok. Yesterday's threat was of disrupting the House of Assembly and threats against the Premier's political future, either implicit or explicit.
But like I said, threats have no place in politics.
Period.
Many years ago, there were threats uttered against another Premier. Some were the kind that gave you a cold sweat. Others were the kind of bluster we see all too often in politics.
One gizmo called into Nite Line back then and talked about how someone needed to push the then-Premier into a van and break his legs out somewhere in the woods. As I recall, the host - sometimes still on the air, unfortunately, - was egging callers on and said absolutely nothing - not a word - to denounce that kind of talk.
Like I said, threats have no place in civilized society.
Same goes for the morons who encourage them one way or another.
Goosing the sauce
Inadvertent humour from politicians?
Oh heavens, say it isn't so.
Danny Williams in a CBC news story on yesterday's crab protest:
"We're not going to allow the union to force us or blackmail us into acting in another manner," Williams says.
and then the Great Quote -
"I don't respond to threats very well at all. I never have and never will."
This is the same guy who threatened to hound Prime Minister Martin if he didn't deliver.
And then, of course, there was the flag thing.
Apparently, the flags weren't going to go back up until Ottawa delivered on the deal.
Then they went back up before that.
The Premier is right. Threats shouldn't be part of politics. He can set the standard. Otherwise, he should expect threats and then more threats, 'cause what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.
Oh heavens, say it isn't so.
Danny Williams in a CBC news story on yesterday's crab protest:
"We're not going to allow the union to force us or blackmail us into acting in another manner," Williams says.
and then the Great Quote -
"I don't respond to threats very well at all. I never have and never will."
This is the same guy who threatened to hound Prime Minister Martin if he didn't deliver.
And then, of course, there was the flag thing.
Apparently, the flags weren't going to go back up until Ottawa delivered on the deal.
Then they went back up before that.
The Premier is right. Threats shouldn't be part of politics. He can set the standard. Otherwise, he should expect threats and then more threats, 'cause what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.
Political risk management
How odd that when you flip from the Rocket Man to federal politics, you find another game of risk management.
The big difference is that I will bet the farm the Titan launch will go flawlessly and nothing will ever even see the Hibernia platform.
In Ottawa, things aren't quite as clear.
As I tell my public relation students, one of the things that makes news is newness or novelty.
Sarcastic bastard that I can be, I am tempted to say that the CTV Ipsos Reid poll benchmarking reaction to Gomery should have received NIL coverage based on that definition of news.
It is hardly news to tell us that federal Liberal support has taken a tumbled after the relentless media hype surrounding Brault's testimony. There has been little substantive reporting of his comments or their potential veracity. Nope. The reporting has been like our own little Michael-Jackson-feeding-liquor-to-little-boys kinda story.
The funky thing about the reporting, like say the National Lampoon's online edition today, is that it tells us a falsehood through the layout. It's an old scandal-sheet trick. Just not the sort of thing you'd expect from a national paper, even Canada's National Joke. There is the big picture of the current prime minister, whose name is Paul Martin in case you missed it. Underneath are words that the "adscam" goes all the way to the PMO. Read it quickly, you'd maybe miss the fact this happened under:
Jean Chretien.
Not a word of testimony has implicated the current Prime Minister.
And yet newspapers from the Lampoon to the Globe and just about every other media outlet can proudly point out that people are ready to punish "Liberals" for this mess.
How could they think anything else? It's all they have heard for months. "Liberals" are doing evil things. "Liberals" are corrupt.
But here's the kicker.
Look closely at the Ipsos poll or the Ekos poll just released. Ekos is available free, so here's the link to the background data.
Fully 83% of people had heard about the Gomery inquiry, yet 62% want to wait until Gomery has reported before an election. If I recall correctly, Ipsos had 83% wanting to wait.
That puts the Opposition in a risk-management mode. They have to juggle the temptation of toppling a government that is vulnerable with the risk that a majority of Canadians might just pounce on anyone seen to be guilty of forcing an election before Canadians want it.
The Cons are especially weak on this point since they expressly put the election call in the hands of Canadians. Nice democratic touch, but sometimes democracy is inconvenient.
The Ekos poll questioning is a bit funky - as in smelly. The way they phrased the question on the current PM being accountable is skewed to produce the result that the PM is accountable for alleged foul deeds there is no evidence he even knew about, let alone was party to. Ekos led their sample to water and the sample drank from the well.
In another question, they asked people if this was the worst scandal they'd ever heard of or just as bad. Not only is this skewed in and of itself, Ekos apparently left out a crucial question: what the hell do people remember of political scandals?
If their memories are junk, then their opinions are not solidly founded. Bullshit question. Bullshit response.
If however, they consider these accusations to be as serious as, say, the old Tory kickback schemes in Quebec, I'd have some info on which to base my judgment. Otherwise, people's shite-memory is vulnerable to new information and their willingness to either toss this government or have an election might be changeable.
The other problem for me, if I was a Con strategist, is the variable performance of my party across the country. Huge in Alberta. Beaten by NDP in the Prairies and BC. Ahead in Ontario but modestly so. Ahead in Quebec but that is meaningless since the Bloc dominates.
And here in Atlantic Canada? The Cons are modestly ahead of the Liberals. Modest is hardly enough to warrant going to the polls.
Ekos attributes the Atlantic Canadian reluctance to a single variable: the fate of the offshore revenue deals. Problem is Ekos doesn't have any research to support their reductionist conclusion.
But it does explain why Stephen Harper is busily scribbling letters to Danny Williams pledging that a Harper Titan election booster won't hit the offshore revenues platform. Reportedly, Harper won't give odds, but Danny is willing to risk billions on the basis of a less-than-perfect set of guarantees.
And Blarney the dinosaur is giving speeches to the St. John's board of trade, spreading nothing except his usual political tripe - there wasn't a single nugget of any Conservative policy in it nor was there anything even vaguely considered to be an insightful comment on current events:
It was a vintage Blarney coprolite.
Of course, both Harper and Blarney aren't telling you that the Cons are changing their position on the offshore in order to get your vote.
But hey.
Politics is the ultimate risk management sport. The variables change quickly, especially if the variable is what you stand for.
and a campaign is the ultimate risk.
The next couple of days will tell how the political parties in Ottawa are judging the risks.
The big difference is that I will bet the farm the Titan launch will go flawlessly and nothing will ever even see the Hibernia platform.
In Ottawa, things aren't quite as clear.
As I tell my public relation students, one of the things that makes news is newness or novelty.
Sarcastic bastard that I can be, I am tempted to say that the CTV Ipsos Reid poll benchmarking reaction to Gomery should have received NIL coverage based on that definition of news.
It is hardly news to tell us that federal Liberal support has taken a tumbled after the relentless media hype surrounding Brault's testimony. There has been little substantive reporting of his comments or their potential veracity. Nope. The reporting has been like our own little Michael-Jackson-feeding-liquor-to-little-boys kinda story.
The funky thing about the reporting, like say the National Lampoon's online edition today, is that it tells us a falsehood through the layout. It's an old scandal-sheet trick. Just not the sort of thing you'd expect from a national paper, even Canada's National Joke. There is the big picture of the current prime minister, whose name is Paul Martin in case you missed it. Underneath are words that the "adscam" goes all the way to the PMO. Read it quickly, you'd maybe miss the fact this happened under:
Jean Chretien.
Not a word of testimony has implicated the current Prime Minister.
And yet newspapers from the Lampoon to the Globe and just about every other media outlet can proudly point out that people are ready to punish "Liberals" for this mess.
How could they think anything else? It's all they have heard for months. "Liberals" are doing evil things. "Liberals" are corrupt.
But here's the kicker.
Look closely at the Ipsos poll or the Ekos poll just released. Ekos is available free, so here's the link to the background data.
Fully 83% of people had heard about the Gomery inquiry, yet 62% want to wait until Gomery has reported before an election. If I recall correctly, Ipsos had 83% wanting to wait.
That puts the Opposition in a risk-management mode. They have to juggle the temptation of toppling a government that is vulnerable with the risk that a majority of Canadians might just pounce on anyone seen to be guilty of forcing an election before Canadians want it.
The Cons are especially weak on this point since they expressly put the election call in the hands of Canadians. Nice democratic touch, but sometimes democracy is inconvenient.
The Ekos poll questioning is a bit funky - as in smelly. The way they phrased the question on the current PM being accountable is skewed to produce the result that the PM is accountable for alleged foul deeds there is no evidence he even knew about, let alone was party to. Ekos led their sample to water and the sample drank from the well.
In another question, they asked people if this was the worst scandal they'd ever heard of or just as bad. Not only is this skewed in and of itself, Ekos apparently left out a crucial question: what the hell do people remember of political scandals?
If their memories are junk, then their opinions are not solidly founded. Bullshit question. Bullshit response.
If however, they consider these accusations to be as serious as, say, the old Tory kickback schemes in Quebec, I'd have some info on which to base my judgment. Otherwise, people's shite-memory is vulnerable to new information and their willingness to either toss this government or have an election might be changeable.
The other problem for me, if I was a Con strategist, is the variable performance of my party across the country. Huge in Alberta. Beaten by NDP in the Prairies and BC. Ahead in Ontario but modestly so. Ahead in Quebec but that is meaningless since the Bloc dominates.
And here in Atlantic Canada? The Cons are modestly ahead of the Liberals. Modest is hardly enough to warrant going to the polls.
Ekos attributes the Atlantic Canadian reluctance to a single variable: the fate of the offshore revenue deals. Problem is Ekos doesn't have any research to support their reductionist conclusion.
But it does explain why Stephen Harper is busily scribbling letters to Danny Williams pledging that a Harper Titan election booster won't hit the offshore revenues platform. Reportedly, Harper won't give odds, but Danny is willing to risk billions on the basis of a less-than-perfect set of guarantees.
And Blarney the dinosaur is giving speeches to the St. John's board of trade, spreading nothing except his usual political tripe - there wasn't a single nugget of any Conservative policy in it nor was there anything even vaguely considered to be an insightful comment on current events:
It was a vintage Blarney coprolite.
Of course, both Harper and Blarney aren't telling you that the Cons are changing their position on the offshore in order to get your vote.
But hey.
Politics is the ultimate risk management sport. The variables change quickly, especially if the variable is what you stand for.
and a campaign is the ultimate risk.
The next couple of days will tell how the political parties in Ottawa are judging the risks.
11 April 2005
Risk management
"The [oil] industry is risk averse," [Premier Danny] Williams said.
That's from a scrum the Premier gave on Sunday about the oil companies and the pending launch of an American satellite launch that will see debris from the rocket used landing - at the closest - 25 kilometres away from the Hibernia and Terra Nova oil production platforms. He's been quoted in a number of news stories saying exactly those words.
Oil companies aren'’t actually risk averse. They are risk managers. Oil companies follow a “"discipline for living with the possibility that future events may cause adverse effects."”
That's from a scrum the Premier gave on Sunday about the oil companies and the pending launch of an American satellite launch that will see debris from the rocket used landing - at the closest - 25 kilometres away from the Hibernia and Terra Nova oil production platforms. He's been quoted in a number of news stories saying exactly those words.
Oil companies aren'’t actually risk averse. They are risk managers. Oil companies follow a “"discipline for living with the possibility that future events may cause adverse effects."”
The truth is out there - if you want to accept it
A rock-steady source of good information sent me some data on launches by the Space Transportation System (STS), otherwise known as the space shuttle. He got it from NASA so I guess they know what they are talking about.
Seems that STS has been known to use an inclination greater than 51 degrees before and they plan to use it again since this takes them to places like the International Space Station.
On that inclination, they transit the Grand Banks and, as my solid source reminded me, that is why St. John's and especially Goose Bay are identified as possible landing sites should the STS encounter some problems.
At the risk of causing the Premier to have apoplexy, I thought it best to share this information with my faithful audience. It certainly helps to put the Titan 4B launch into perspective.
In the list that follows, I have edited so that only the launch inclinations greater than 50 degrees are included. Note that inclination is taken using the Equator as zero degrees. A 90 degree inclination is a polar orbit heading over the North Pole first. A 180 inclination would put something into orbit along the Equator opposite to the Earth's rotation. For a better discussion of STS mission inclinations, try this page.
Here's the editted list. Note the frequency the STS uses those high inclinations.
STS//Inclination// Notes
STS-9 57.0 HIGH
41g 51.7 HIGH
STS-51-B 57.0 HIGH
STS-61-A 57.0 HIGH
STS-27 57.0 HIGH
STS-28 57.0 HIGH
STS-36 62.0 HIGH
STS-39 57.0 HIGH
STS-48 57.0 HIGH
STS-42 57.0 HIGH
STS-45 57.0 HIGH
STS-47 57.0 HIGH
STS-53 57.0 HIGH
STS-56 57.0 HIGH
STS-59 56.9 HIGH
STS-60 56.4 HIGH
STS-64 56.9 HIGH
STS-68 57.0 HIGH
STS-66 57.0 HIGH
STS-63 51.6 HIGH
STS-71 51.6 HIGH
STS-74 51.6 HIGH
STS-76 51.6 HIGH
STS-79 51.7 HIGH
STS-81 51.6 HIGH
STS-84 51.7 HIGH
STS-85 57.0 HIGH
STS-86 51.6 HIGH
STS-89 51.6 HIGH
STS-88 51.6 HIGH
STS-91 51.7 HIGH
STS-92 51.6 HIGH
STS-96 51.6 HIGH
STS-97 51.6 HIGH
STS-98 51.5 HIGH
STS-99 57.0 HIGH
STS-101 51.6 HIGH
STS-102 51.5 HIGH
STS-106 51.6 HIGH
STS-100 51.6 HIGH
STS-104 51.6 HIGH
STS-105 51.6 HIGH
STS-108 51.6 HIGH
STS-110 51.6 HIGH
STS-111 51.6 HIGH
STS-112 51.6 HIGH
STS-113 51.6 HIGH
Planned future launches
STS-114 51.6 HIGH
STS-121 51.6 HIGH
STS-115 51.6 HIGH
STS-116 51.6 HIGH
STS-117 51.6 HIGH
Seems that STS has been known to use an inclination greater than 51 degrees before and they plan to use it again since this takes them to places like the International Space Station.
On that inclination, they transit the Grand Banks and, as my solid source reminded me, that is why St. John's and especially Goose Bay are identified as possible landing sites should the STS encounter some problems.
At the risk of causing the Premier to have apoplexy, I thought it best to share this information with my faithful audience. It certainly helps to put the Titan 4B launch into perspective.
In the list that follows, I have edited so that only the launch inclinations greater than 50 degrees are included. Note that inclination is taken using the Equator as zero degrees. A 90 degree inclination is a polar orbit heading over the North Pole first. A 180 inclination would put something into orbit along the Equator opposite to the Earth's rotation. For a better discussion of STS mission inclinations, try this page.
Here's the editted list. Note the frequency the STS uses those high inclinations.
STS//Inclination// Notes
STS-9 57.0 HIGH
41g 51.7 HIGH
STS-51-B 57.0 HIGH
STS-61-A 57.0 HIGH
STS-27 57.0 HIGH
STS-28 57.0 HIGH
STS-36 62.0 HIGH
STS-39 57.0 HIGH
STS-48 57.0 HIGH
STS-42 57.0 HIGH
STS-45 57.0 HIGH
STS-47 57.0 HIGH
STS-53 57.0 HIGH
STS-56 57.0 HIGH
STS-59 56.9 HIGH
STS-60 56.4 HIGH
STS-64 56.9 HIGH
STS-68 57.0 HIGH
STS-66 57.0 HIGH
STS-63 51.6 HIGH
STS-71 51.6 HIGH
STS-74 51.6 HIGH
STS-76 51.6 HIGH
STS-79 51.7 HIGH
STS-81 51.6 HIGH
STS-84 51.7 HIGH
STS-85 57.0 HIGH
STS-86 51.6 HIGH
STS-89 51.6 HIGH
STS-88 51.6 HIGH
STS-91 51.7 HIGH
STS-92 51.6 HIGH
STS-96 51.6 HIGH
STS-97 51.6 HIGH
STS-98 51.5 HIGH
STS-99 57.0 HIGH
STS-101 51.6 HIGH
STS-102 51.5 HIGH
STS-106 51.6 HIGH
STS-100 51.6 HIGH
STS-104 51.6 HIGH
STS-105 51.6 HIGH
STS-108 51.6 HIGH
STS-110 51.6 HIGH
STS-111 51.6 HIGH
STS-112 51.6 HIGH
STS-113 51.6 HIGH
Planned future launches
STS-114 51.6 HIGH
STS-121 51.6 HIGH
STS-115 51.6 HIGH
STS-116 51.6 HIGH
STS-117 51.6 HIGH
10 April 2005
Danger Danny Williams! Danger Danny Williams!
Is anyone really surprised that Danny Williams has even more questions after getting a full briefing than he had when he first heard about a booster landing in the Atlantic Ocean?
Now he's talking about problems with "something that big" hitting the seabed or changing wave patterns. I saw the scrum clips for myself on CTV NewsNet so I know exactly what the man said. Here's the script version of their story, just for good measure.
For those who want another script version, here's the Canadian Press account. Note that some Canadian officials were excluded from a portion of the briefing. Pretty simple stuff actually - that bit of the briefing likely contained highly classified information that some of the Canadians weren't cleared to receive. Here's another reason why the provincial government here needs to have someone working on public security full-time who is also cleared to at least Level III, commonly called Top Secret. It's also why it is useless to send a university professor from MUN's engineering school to participate in a meeting where classified information may be discussed. But that's actually one of the substantive issues here that is being ignored in what seems to evolving into our own version of Space Cowboys.
Butt look it is actually pretty simple. And I have to say: "Danny, my son, look, how many times do we have to explain it to you?"
1. Nothing "that big" is hitting anything. The booster rocket will disintegrate and shower down bits and pieces over a huge piece of ocean. Even if for some reason an entire section of missile comes down intact, the odds of it hitting the platforms or doing any substantive damage are astronomically small. If you want a 100% guarantee, I guess you won't be flying anywhere any time soon on a commercial airliner, or for that matter walking outside the door of your house to go to work.
2. By the time any of this rocket lands on the seabed, it will be slowed down and distributed around by ocean currents. Go sue White Star Line for the frickin Titanic, bye. It had a bigger impact than this thing will ever have.
3. As for the ocean currents stuff, I think it is time for Jon Lien and Dave Suzuki to do an intervention here. Holy crap, Batman, this is just foolish.
4. The Hibernia platform is being moved and the Terra Nova and White Rose FPSOs are being towed 30-50 miles off positions because that's what the oil company lawyers and insurance companies want to do. But it is the oil companies who are making that decision, not Danny Williams. That's why the Monday meeting is so interesting - the companies have already taken their decisions; what's left to discuss except maybe legal action.
5. As for cost, expect that the companies will file suit in US courts to recover their costs and damages from the US Air Force. Maybe Danny will do the same, join their suit or hop up and down until Ottawa files some sort of protest.
At the end of it all, though, the Premier doesn't have to jump up and down to get answers. All the information he needs is readily available and has been since the start of this whole affair. The Premier just has to accept what he is being told by various experts. If he doesn't want to accept that information or if he wants to set arbitrary and totally impossible objectives, then that's his call.
My question about all this is resolving down to this: why is Danny Williams talking about this? Who is he representing? What exactly does he want to get out of it?
Now he's talking about problems with "something that big" hitting the seabed or changing wave patterns. I saw the scrum clips for myself on CTV NewsNet so I know exactly what the man said. Here's the script version of their story, just for good measure.
For those who want another script version, here's the Canadian Press account. Note that some Canadian officials were excluded from a portion of the briefing. Pretty simple stuff actually - that bit of the briefing likely contained highly classified information that some of the Canadians weren't cleared to receive. Here's another reason why the provincial government here needs to have someone working on public security full-time who is also cleared to at least Level III, commonly called Top Secret. It's also why it is useless to send a university professor from MUN's engineering school to participate in a meeting where classified information may be discussed. But that's actually one of the substantive issues here that is being ignored in what seems to evolving into our own version of Space Cowboys.
Butt look it is actually pretty simple. And I have to say: "Danny, my son, look, how many times do we have to explain it to you?"
1. Nothing "that big" is hitting anything. The booster rocket will disintegrate and shower down bits and pieces over a huge piece of ocean. Even if for some reason an entire section of missile comes down intact, the odds of it hitting the platforms or doing any substantive damage are astronomically small. If you want a 100% guarantee, I guess you won't be flying anywhere any time soon on a commercial airliner, or for that matter walking outside the door of your house to go to work.
2. By the time any of this rocket lands on the seabed, it will be slowed down and distributed around by ocean currents. Go sue White Star Line for the frickin Titanic, bye. It had a bigger impact than this thing will ever have.
3. As for the ocean currents stuff, I think it is time for Jon Lien and Dave Suzuki to do an intervention here. Holy crap, Batman, this is just foolish.
4. The Hibernia platform is being moved and the Terra Nova and White Rose FPSOs are being towed 30-50 miles off positions because that's what the oil company lawyers and insurance companies want to do. But it is the oil companies who are making that decision, not Danny Williams. That's why the Monday meeting is so interesting - the companies have already taken their decisions; what's left to discuss except maybe legal action.
5. As for cost, expect that the companies will file suit in US courts to recover their costs and damages from the US Air Force. Maybe Danny will do the same, join their suit or hop up and down until Ottawa files some sort of protest.
At the end of it all, though, the Premier doesn't have to jump up and down to get answers. All the information he needs is readily available and has been since the start of this whole affair. The Premier just has to accept what he is being told by various experts. If he doesn't want to accept that information or if he wants to set arbitrary and totally impossible objectives, then that's his call.
My question about all this is resolving down to this: why is Danny Williams talking about this? Who is he representing? What exactly does he want to get out of it?
Double-plus good
There is saying things in few words and then there is adding a bit of interpretation to the few words that the end result doesn't quite match a little thing called reality.
VOCM is at it again this morning, reporting on the postponement of the NROL-16 launch at Canaveral.
"The U-S has postponed this week's planned launch of a Titan rocket. A spokesman for Deputy Prime Minister Anne McLellan says the Americans have delayed Wednesday's launch until April 17th. In the meantime talks will continue to allay Canadian concerns that East Coast oil rigs could be damaged by falling pieces of space junk, but McLellan is showing little concern. In the meantime talks will continue to allay Canadian concerns."
Ok.
Look at those last two sentences and break them out.
Talks will still go on, according to VOCM in order to "allay Canadian concerns" although if you read a little bit further, the federal cabinet minister responsible for being concerned about these sorts of things (i.e. the Government of Canada) "is showing little concern".
Two things, aside from the excessive use of the word "concern" and the phrase "talks will continue" in such a short space:
1. The meeting in Halifax was designed to address specific issues among the people with assets supposedly at risk (namely the operators of the platforms) and to deal with Danny William's issues primarily for their noisy political impact. That is noise as in devoid of signal. This hardly constitutes "Canadian" concerns as if the whole country was headed for the border to invade if the rocket tries to leave Florida. That phrase actually looks close to some official American approaches - namely that they are addressing "Canadian" concerns, because They don't distinguish among Canadians like Canadians do.
2. McLellan showing little concern would be a misleading intepretation. She has said - and rightly so - that the chances of this rocket hitting the platforms is almost non-existant. As in "will never happen".
VOCM's version implicitly criticizes McLellan for not being as enraged as Danny Williams; that's where I get a problem. Now while we can quibble about other issues like the Accord, in this instance, Williams is increasingly floating into orbit himself without any justification.
That's because in a short space of time Williams went from being what we in the politicial business call "responsible" for raising concerns based on limited information to being what we in most of society call "hysterical" - as in give someone a Valium - for ignoring solid information in favour of rants.
The truth is out there. Danny just needs to accept it.
As for VOCM, that's two Dubious Interpretation Prizes they've garnered on just this one story.
I, for one, am getting concerned.
VOCM is at it again this morning, reporting on the postponement of the NROL-16 launch at Canaveral.
"The U-S has postponed this week's planned launch of a Titan rocket. A spokesman for Deputy Prime Minister Anne McLellan says the Americans have delayed Wednesday's launch until April 17th. In the meantime talks will continue to allay Canadian concerns that East Coast oil rigs could be damaged by falling pieces of space junk, but McLellan is showing little concern. In the meantime talks will continue to allay Canadian concerns."
Ok.
Look at those last two sentences and break them out.
Talks will still go on, according to VOCM in order to "allay Canadian concerns" although if you read a little bit further, the federal cabinet minister responsible for being concerned about these sorts of things (i.e. the Government of Canada) "is showing little concern".
Two things, aside from the excessive use of the word "concern" and the phrase "talks will continue" in such a short space:
1. The meeting in Halifax was designed to address specific issues among the people with assets supposedly at risk (namely the operators of the platforms) and to deal with Danny William's issues primarily for their noisy political impact. That is noise as in devoid of signal. This hardly constitutes "Canadian" concerns as if the whole country was headed for the border to invade if the rocket tries to leave Florida. That phrase actually looks close to some official American approaches - namely that they are addressing "Canadian" concerns, because They don't distinguish among Canadians like Canadians do.
2. McLellan showing little concern would be a misleading intepretation. She has said - and rightly so - that the chances of this rocket hitting the platforms is almost non-existant. As in "will never happen".
VOCM's version implicitly criticizes McLellan for not being as enraged as Danny Williams; that's where I get a problem. Now while we can quibble about other issues like the Accord, in this instance, Williams is increasingly floating into orbit himself without any justification.
That's because in a short space of time Williams went from being what we in the politicial business call "responsible" for raising concerns based on limited information to being what we in most of society call "hysterical" - as in give someone a Valium - for ignoring solid information in favour of rants.
The truth is out there. Danny just needs to accept it.
As for VOCM, that's two Dubious Interpretation Prizes they've garnered on just this one story.
I, for one, am getting concerned.
And then another day brings the appearance of changes
The launch of a US Air Force Titan 4B is being delayed owing to unspecified problems with ground equipment involved in loading the oxider, according to a news release from 45 Space Wing, Cape Canaveral Air Force Station on Saturday.
Mission B-30 has been postponed several times in the past month for the same reason. As of Friday, 08 Apr 05, the launch is delayed indefinitely, as is another mission using a Delta 4 rocket.
CBC news is linking the delay to a meeting in Dartmouth Saturday of officials from Newfoundland and Labrador, the Government of Canada and the United States government to discuss the launch and implications for the Hibernia and Terra Nova platforms. The link is to an older story, but late Saturday night, CBC Radio news tied the delay to the meeting.
Canadian Press, meanwhile, reports that US officials provided Canadian federal and provincial officials with the American risk assessment on the launch. Earlier comments by Premier Danny Williams of Newfoundland and Labrador suggested the Americans had made their plans without taking account of the Hibernia and Terra Nova platforms. Public affairs officers from USAF Space Command contradict this assessment by the Premier, emphasizing that the platforms are outside the debris zone.
Federal public security minister and deputy prime minister Anne McLellan today reporters on Saturday that "[t]he risk is absolutely minuscule. If one is looking at a risk of one in 10 trillion, then you realize that the risk is absolutely minimal." [Emphasis added]
To get an accurate version of comments by US State department briefer Richard Boucher go to the State Department website. Media reports and comments by Premier Williams that there was confusion as to the date of the launch appear to be a misinterpretation of Boucher's comments. The date April 13 is suggested as the date Boucher believes is the correct one - he says "I think" - and then refers reporters to the US Department of Defence for further comment. The US DOD public affairs website contains no mention of the issue and the story does not appear to have picked up any attention from US news outlets.
For those curious about details, here is a link to the hazard area related to the launch originally planned for 10 Apr 05 and now postponed indefinitely. This is not the debris zone, but the area of maximum hazard to air and marine interests at the time of launch and immediately after. Note that this hazard warning lists the launch complex CX-40. This should not be confused with other numerical identifiers like NROL-16 and B-30.
Taken, altogether in one spot, there are three postions here that one can see quite easily. They can be summarised as follows:
1. The US government and its agencies are launching a military satellite into a specific orbit and intend to carry on with the launch, barring any technical delays.
The Canadian federal government appears to be accepting American assurances on the safety of the launch. This is a reasonable position given the issues involved.
2. The platform operators are taking prudent actions like planning to shut down operations and are likely assessing the risks from this launch to their direct financial interests in offshore oil production. They are entitled to take these precautions. Any compensation would be a legal matter; I suspect the operators are getting advice from their lawyers and insurers to be extremely cautious.
3. The Government of Newfoundland and Labrador is taking an extreme position, without having apparently taken responsibility for shutting down production. Premier Williams comments have been extreme, are often at odds with established facts, history and the advice and information already in the public domain that suggest the risk to the offshore platforms is minimal, negligible or virtually non-existant.
The Premier has insisted on changes to USAF plans which are highly unlikely to ever take place. Simply put, he doesn't have the juice to make them happen, nor does Canada.
Further, the Premier's personal involvement in this matter remains unexplained. The Premier is neither the minister repsonsible for the offshore (Ed Byrne), nor the minister responsible for intergovernmental affairs (Tom Marshall), nor the minister responsible for emergency response (Jack Byrne) unless each of these three ministers is on leave. Of course, as first minister the premier can do just about anything he wants. It just seems strange that he has taken control of this issue and made statements which are at odds with established facts.
His rhetoric has heightened anxiety in the public about this matter apparently needlessly.
Will the Premier being seeking monetary compensation from the United States government for losses incurred by the provincial government in the event of a launch even if there is no affect to the rig (excepting as a result of decisions taken by the operators) . Will this become the basis for an Atlantic Missile Accord? His approach thus far is consistent with what one might expect from the lawyer representing the future plaintiff in a law suit.
Mission B-30 has been postponed several times in the past month for the same reason. As of Friday, 08 Apr 05, the launch is delayed indefinitely, as is another mission using a Delta 4 rocket.
CBC news is linking the delay to a meeting in Dartmouth Saturday of officials from Newfoundland and Labrador, the Government of Canada and the United States government to discuss the launch and implications for the Hibernia and Terra Nova platforms. The link is to an older story, but late Saturday night, CBC Radio news tied the delay to the meeting.
Canadian Press, meanwhile, reports that US officials provided Canadian federal and provincial officials with the American risk assessment on the launch. Earlier comments by Premier Danny Williams of Newfoundland and Labrador suggested the Americans had made their plans without taking account of the Hibernia and Terra Nova platforms. Public affairs officers from USAF Space Command contradict this assessment by the Premier, emphasizing that the platforms are outside the debris zone.
Federal public security minister and deputy prime minister Anne McLellan today reporters on Saturday that "[t]he risk is absolutely minuscule. If one is looking at a risk of one in 10 trillion, then you realize that the risk is absolutely minimal." [Emphasis added]
To get an accurate version of comments by US State department briefer Richard Boucher go to the State Department website. Media reports and comments by Premier Williams that there was confusion as to the date of the launch appear to be a misinterpretation of Boucher's comments. The date April 13 is suggested as the date Boucher believes is the correct one - he says "I think" - and then refers reporters to the US Department of Defence for further comment. The US DOD public affairs website contains no mention of the issue and the story does not appear to have picked up any attention from US news outlets.
For those curious about details, here is a link to the hazard area related to the launch originally planned for 10 Apr 05 and now postponed indefinitely. This is not the debris zone, but the area of maximum hazard to air and marine interests at the time of launch and immediately after. Note that this hazard warning lists the launch complex CX-40. This should not be confused with other numerical identifiers like NROL-16 and B-30.
Taken, altogether in one spot, there are three postions here that one can see quite easily. They can be summarised as follows:
1. The US government and its agencies are launching a military satellite into a specific orbit and intend to carry on with the launch, barring any technical delays.
The Canadian federal government appears to be accepting American assurances on the safety of the launch. This is a reasonable position given the issues involved.
2. The platform operators are taking prudent actions like planning to shut down operations and are likely assessing the risks from this launch to their direct financial interests in offshore oil production. They are entitled to take these precautions. Any compensation would be a legal matter; I suspect the operators are getting advice from their lawyers and insurers to be extremely cautious.
3. The Government of Newfoundland and Labrador is taking an extreme position, without having apparently taken responsibility for shutting down production. Premier Williams comments have been extreme, are often at odds with established facts, history and the advice and information already in the public domain that suggest the risk to the offshore platforms is minimal, negligible or virtually non-existant.
The Premier has insisted on changes to USAF plans which are highly unlikely to ever take place. Simply put, he doesn't have the juice to make them happen, nor does Canada.
Further, the Premier's personal involvement in this matter remains unexplained. The Premier is neither the minister repsonsible for the offshore (Ed Byrne), nor the minister responsible for intergovernmental affairs (Tom Marshall), nor the minister responsible for emergency response (Jack Byrne) unless each of these three ministers is on leave. Of course, as first minister the premier can do just about anything he wants. It just seems strange that he has taken control of this issue and made statements which are at odds with established facts.
His rhetoric has heightened anxiety in the public about this matter apparently needlessly.
Will the Premier being seeking monetary compensation from the United States government for losses incurred by the provincial government in the event of a launch even if there is no affect to the rig (excepting as a result of decisions taken by the operators) . Will this become the basis for an Atlantic Missile Accord? His approach thus far is consistent with what one might expect from the lawyer representing the future plaintiff in a law suit.
09 April 2005
What a difference a few hours make - updated
Hearing Premier Williams' scrum Friday on the Titan booster crisis made me want to take back the good things I posted about him earlier.
Friday we got the old hysterical Danny from the offshore revenues fracas. Here's the CBC Here and Now broadcast from Friday complete with Deanne Fleet's report at time incidence 6:39. This link needs RealPlayer. CBC uses a submarine launched ballistic missile to illustrate the story - missile guys. The Premier uses a 1998 Titan accident (see "The Missileer") to highlight why he is worried. The Premier sounds increasingly like a guy building a case for suing on behalf of a client with "stress". Remember the guy who sued Fear Factor because he was grossed out by one of the food stunts? You get the idea.
The Premier sounded hysterical in the sense of "uncontrollably emotional; convulsive, fitful...In a state of panic or behaving in a wild irrational manner, due to fear or emotional trauma."
We are living under a threat, according to the Premier.
He needs an assurance from the US government that this missile has absolutely "zero" chances of hitting the Hibernia rig or that if it comes close that the impact won't disrupt the rig. Someone should make the transcript public so people can see everything the Premier said and how he said it.
The Premier has caused unwarranted and unneeded public worry with his irresponsible comments.
To make matters worse, some national media are now talking about a missile flying "over Newfoundland" when the bloody thing will actually burn up on re-entry over 400 kilometres out to sea.
In the meantime, the Premier is apparently miffed, perplexed, annoyed and angered that people are giving conflicting information. Well, that's easy enough to solve: give me a call and I'll set you straight.
The CBC nationally has picked up this same crap, referring to conflicts between agencies in the US government that actually don't have anything directly to do with the launch. Some guy from State says the launch is on for Wednesday, which is likely what his subordinates briefed him. meantime some Captain from Space Command in Colorado says the date hasn't been reset.
Now I am not sure how reporters followed their daisy chain to get comments from these guys but let me put this out there as a wild-eyed, radical like a Russian-anarchist kind of idea:
The rocket is being fired by USAF Space Command, so the Space Command guy likely knows what he is talking about. The guy from State probably needed a briefing on where Canada was let alone why some place called New Finland was upset.
In any event, the launch was postponed for technical reasons and once those reasons are fixed, up she goes. That's what I have been saying all along. Won't someone please pay attention?
But what's the conflict furrowing the brow of Der Premier? Literally whether or not there is a one in 10 million or a one in a trillion chance of the rig being affected in any way possible. As I listened to the scrum played today by Ted Blades "On the Go" I heard a personal injury lawyer who can see the red lights on the ambulance.
We live under threat, alright: A threat that someone with a grip on reality might seize the microphone and tell everyone to go back to sleep.
We live now under a new threat. Engineers are reportedly meeting tomorrow (Saturday) to put some kind of firm numbers on the probability of impact. Add the lawyers to the equation and we will get even more confusion.
In the meantime, I will drag everyone back to what I said before: there is no problem. There is no threat. The odds are either one in 10 million or one in a trillion the platforms won't be hit by a piece of the Titan 403B booster.
I wish I could get those kind of odds that say Danny Williams might take a pill before his next scrum on this subject.
Gimme a frickin' break.
Friday we got the old hysterical Danny from the offshore revenues fracas. Here's the CBC Here and Now broadcast from Friday complete with Deanne Fleet's report at time incidence 6:39. This link needs RealPlayer. CBC uses a submarine launched ballistic missile to illustrate the story - missile guys. The Premier uses a 1998 Titan accident (see "The Missileer") to highlight why he is worried. The Premier sounds increasingly like a guy building a case for suing on behalf of a client with "stress". Remember the guy who sued Fear Factor because he was grossed out by one of the food stunts? You get the idea.
The Premier sounded hysterical in the sense of "uncontrollably emotional; convulsive, fitful...In a state of panic or behaving in a wild irrational manner, due to fear or emotional trauma."
We are living under a threat, according to the Premier.
He needs an assurance from the US government that this missile has absolutely "zero" chances of hitting the Hibernia rig or that if it comes close that the impact won't disrupt the rig. Someone should make the transcript public so people can see everything the Premier said and how he said it.
The Premier has caused unwarranted and unneeded public worry with his irresponsible comments.
To make matters worse, some national media are now talking about a missile flying "over Newfoundland" when the bloody thing will actually burn up on re-entry over 400 kilometres out to sea.
In the meantime, the Premier is apparently miffed, perplexed, annoyed and angered that people are giving conflicting information. Well, that's easy enough to solve: give me a call and I'll set you straight.
The CBC nationally has picked up this same crap, referring to conflicts between agencies in the US government that actually don't have anything directly to do with the launch. Some guy from State says the launch is on for Wednesday, which is likely what his subordinates briefed him. meantime some Captain from Space Command in Colorado says the date hasn't been reset.
Now I am not sure how reporters followed their daisy chain to get comments from these guys but let me put this out there as a wild-eyed, radical like a Russian-anarchist kind of idea:
The rocket is being fired by USAF Space Command, so the Space Command guy likely knows what he is talking about. The guy from State probably needed a briefing on where Canada was let alone why some place called New Finland was upset.
In any event, the launch was postponed for technical reasons and once those reasons are fixed, up she goes. That's what I have been saying all along. Won't someone please pay attention?
But what's the conflict furrowing the brow of Der Premier? Literally whether or not there is a one in 10 million or a one in a trillion chance of the rig being affected in any way possible. As I listened to the scrum played today by Ted Blades "On the Go" I heard a personal injury lawyer who can see the red lights on the ambulance.
We live under threat, alright: A threat that someone with a grip on reality might seize the microphone and tell everyone to go back to sleep.
We live now under a new threat. Engineers are reportedly meeting tomorrow (Saturday) to put some kind of firm numbers on the probability of impact. Add the lawyers to the equation and we will get even more confusion.
In the meantime, I will drag everyone back to what I said before: there is no problem. There is no threat. The odds are either one in 10 million or one in a trillion the platforms won't be hit by a piece of the Titan 403B booster.
I wish I could get those kind of odds that say Danny Williams might take a pill before his next scrum on this subject.
Gimme a frickin' break.
08 April 2005
The Missileer
If you haven't heard enough about rockets, then I am here to feed your curiosity and hopefully, allay some of the anxiety that has seized our beloved Premier.
Here are some basic points that I suspected but which are now confirmed as well as some links to yet more background information.
See, Premier Williams, there is no reason for you to be confused if your staff used the internet.
Or called me in. After all, I have spent about half my life on defence issues and I currently work as a defence policy consultant.
1. USAF Space Command knew the Hibernia and Terra Nova platforms were there all along. As their public affairs spokesman said, the odds of a missile hitting a tiny oil rig in the middle of the vast ocean are small, maybe one in a trillion, especially when the platforms are outside the debris zone.
2. The Titan is a combined solid and liquid fueled missile. The side boosters are solid fueled and burn out shortly after launch. The main propulsion unit is the liquid-fueled Titan which has been in USAF service since the 1950s.
3. They have way too much experience with operating this system to make dumb mistakes about debris zones and impact areas for debris. Lquid fueled systems are great because you can predict where they will land with much greater accuracy than solid fueled systems. You can also cut off their power when you want to and do all sorts of other things with them you can't do with their solid fueled cousins.
4. A similar Titan rocket was fired on a similar trajectory in 1994 without incident.
5. The more recent loss of a Titan 4A from Canaveral is worth paying attention to because:
a. the Premier used it to bolster his hysteria at a scrum today; and,
b. he is WRONG.
The incident occured in 1998 and involved an older version of this particular booster. That missile was destroyed by the on-board self-destruct mechanism shortly after launch when problems occured. These were later attributed to wiring problems. It never got close to Canadian waters - in fact it traveled exactly 4, 422 feet from the launchpad. Here's a link to the full report.
A subsequent launch of the 4B version went off flawlessly, as reported at this link.
For a description of a two-stage Titan launch try this link from 2003. The version here had an extra boost vehicle designed to manoeuvre the payload into orbit. I erroneously described this as a second stage earlier; that doesn't change my assessment that there is a near zero chance (one in a trillion) of any debris from the B-30 launch landing within sight of Hibernia and Terra Nova.
6. Here's a link to a story on the delay of the current mission, dated 07 April 2005.
7. Here's a link on the payload likely being carried. It describes radar imaging in layman's terms. Read this and you will understand, Premier, why this launch will not be scrubbed and why there is virtually a zero chance of it being fired off on a trajectory designed solely to calm your nerves.
At least this little episode has caused me to find a raft of new sources on the web for tracking space-related issues.
Here are some basic points that I suspected but which are now confirmed as well as some links to yet more background information.
See, Premier Williams, there is no reason for you to be confused if your staff used the internet.
Or called me in. After all, I have spent about half my life on defence issues and I currently work as a defence policy consultant.
1. USAF Space Command knew the Hibernia and Terra Nova platforms were there all along. As their public affairs spokesman said, the odds of a missile hitting a tiny oil rig in the middle of the vast ocean are small, maybe one in a trillion, especially when the platforms are outside the debris zone.
2. The Titan is a combined solid and liquid fueled missile. The side boosters are solid fueled and burn out shortly after launch. The main propulsion unit is the liquid-fueled Titan which has been in USAF service since the 1950s.
3. They have way too much experience with operating this system to make dumb mistakes about debris zones and impact areas for debris. Lquid fueled systems are great because you can predict where they will land with much greater accuracy than solid fueled systems. You can also cut off their power when you want to and do all sorts of other things with them you can't do with their solid fueled cousins.
4. A similar Titan rocket was fired on a similar trajectory in 1994 without incident.
5. The more recent loss of a Titan 4A from Canaveral is worth paying attention to because:
a. the Premier used it to bolster his hysteria at a scrum today; and,
b. he is WRONG.
The incident occured in 1998 and involved an older version of this particular booster. That missile was destroyed by the on-board self-destruct mechanism shortly after launch when problems occured. These were later attributed to wiring problems. It never got close to Canadian waters - in fact it traveled exactly 4, 422 feet from the launchpad. Here's a link to the full report.
A subsequent launch of the 4B version went off flawlessly, as reported at this link.
For a description of a two-stage Titan launch try this link from 2003. The version here had an extra boost vehicle designed to manoeuvre the payload into orbit. I erroneously described this as a second stage earlier; that doesn't change my assessment that there is a near zero chance (one in a trillion) of any debris from the B-30 launch landing within sight of Hibernia and Terra Nova.
6. Here's a link to a story on the delay of the current mission, dated 07 April 2005.
7. Here's a link on the payload likely being carried. It describes radar imaging in layman's terms. Read this and you will understand, Premier, why this launch will not be scrubbed and why there is virtually a zero chance of it being fired off on a trajectory designed solely to calm your nerves.
At least this little episode has caused me to find a raft of new sources on the web for tracking space-related issues.
Here's where the Nat Lamp went
Meanwhile over at the National Post, the editors took complete leave of their senses and turned what was once a decent news rag into the National Lampoon today. Such is their frenzy to pry the Liberals from power in Ottawa and install Stephen Harper.
The feature piece, as posted to the website at least, is Don Martin's news story (?)...column (?)...screenplay(?)... titled "Canada's Watergate".
Here's the lede:
"He glanced at reporters salivating to escape his news quarantine, looked at the bank of television cameras carrying his inquiry live for the first time in a week and issued the order: Unleash hell."
And then a few paragraphs later:
"The dam protecting federal Liberals from the disclosure of their party's ugly past had been breached -- and Canada's Watergate spilled out."
Alright, Don, let's start by reminding people that you are are the guy captured in the CBC doc on the last federal election who was close to tears because your pre-written story on the Glorious Conservative Victory was rendered as hamster-cage bedding by...wait for it...the ordinary voters of Canada.
In order to write such drivel, Don either never heard of Gomery before or he thinks his readers are mouth-breathing idiots.
News quarantine? Gomery had three choices when dealing with the motion for a publication ban to protect Jean Brault's right to a fair trial. He could have rejected it. He could have accepted it, as he did, knowing full well, based on ample experience across the country, that some schmuck will give a briefing to US bloggers who will print the material and thereby frustrate the ban.
"News quarantine"? Let's thank God Don's a keyboard pounder and not in charge of communicable disease control for Metro Toronto health authorities during the next SARS outbreak.
Gomery's third choice was in camera hearings, in which the media and general public would be barred. Poof: that's a real news quarantine. Unless there was some legal reason why he didn't have the power, Gomery's "news quarantine" was a Trojan with a few holes poked in it.
"Unleash hell"? This line is lifted straight from some 1930s dime-store novel, or given its hysterical nature, any recent scrum by Danny Williams.
And only in a display of sheer ignorance - as in stupidity, as in a lack of any ethical standards whatsoever - would Martin compare whatever Gomery is investigating to a conspiracy at the highest levels of the US government to commit criminal acts like break and enter in order to subvert democracy, smear political opponents and then systematically cover-up the whole business.
The only upside to Martin's piece is that, as I recall, he didn't use the word "explosive" once.
Don Martin obviously must be the guy who used to scribble cartoons for MAD magazine.
Canada's contender for the title of real national newspaper, today became a national joke.
And if I want laughs, I'll go read the real thing.
The feature piece, as posted to the website at least, is Don Martin's news story (?)...column (?)...screenplay(?)... titled "Canada's Watergate".
Here's the lede:
"He glanced at reporters salivating to escape his news quarantine, looked at the bank of television cameras carrying his inquiry live for the first time in a week and issued the order: Unleash hell."
And then a few paragraphs later:
"The dam protecting federal Liberals from the disclosure of their party's ugly past had been breached -- and Canada's Watergate spilled out."
Alright, Don, let's start by reminding people that you are are the guy captured in the CBC doc on the last federal election who was close to tears because your pre-written story on the Glorious Conservative Victory was rendered as hamster-cage bedding by...wait for it...the ordinary voters of Canada.
In order to write such drivel, Don either never heard of Gomery before or he thinks his readers are mouth-breathing idiots.
News quarantine? Gomery had three choices when dealing with the motion for a publication ban to protect Jean Brault's right to a fair trial. He could have rejected it. He could have accepted it, as he did, knowing full well, based on ample experience across the country, that some schmuck will give a briefing to US bloggers who will print the material and thereby frustrate the ban.
"News quarantine"? Let's thank God Don's a keyboard pounder and not in charge of communicable disease control for Metro Toronto health authorities during the next SARS outbreak.
Gomery's third choice was in camera hearings, in which the media and general public would be barred. Poof: that's a real news quarantine. Unless there was some legal reason why he didn't have the power, Gomery's "news quarantine" was a Trojan with a few holes poked in it.
"Unleash hell"? This line is lifted straight from some 1930s dime-store novel, or given its hysterical nature, any recent scrum by Danny Williams.
And only in a display of sheer ignorance - as in stupidity, as in a lack of any ethical standards whatsoever - would Martin compare whatever Gomery is investigating to a conspiracy at the highest levels of the US government to commit criminal acts like break and enter in order to subvert democracy, smear political opponents and then systematically cover-up the whole business.
The only upside to Martin's piece is that, as I recall, he didn't use the word "explosive" once.
Don Martin obviously must be the guy who used to scribble cartoons for MAD magazine.
Canada's contender for the title of real national newspaper, today became a national joke.
And if I want laughs, I'll go read the real thing.
Dear Premier Williams...
if you are finding this whole Titan rocket thing a bit confusing owing to mixed messages, as CBC is reporting, then I have a simple piece of advice:
Give me a call.
I will gladly provide you with accurate information and analysis of this and similar issues. My rates are reasonable.
Yes, this is a shameless act of self-promotion but that doesn't mean it isn't justified.
Give me a call.
I will gladly provide you with accurate information and analysis of this and similar issues. My rates are reasonable.
Yes, this is a shameless act of self-promotion but that doesn't mean it isn't justified.
Getting it right and other Titan-ic issues
Without making it a great saga, I posted comments this morning about the province's response to the Titan booster issue and specifically some comments attributed to the Premier that came from a VOCM story. The story is still posted, so you can go and have a look at it for yourself.
As I have said before, VOCM is a news outlet than can describe a situation accurately in as few words as possible. Sometimes, though, interpretations can go astray or the few words chosen can lead people like me to make the wrong conclusion.
Here's the bit in question: "Meantime, Premier Williams says the incident drives home the need for a missile defence system. He is a strong backer of the part that Happy Valley-Goose Bay can play in such a system."
When I read that, I had a hard time figuring how anyone could link these two things together. My post - since deleted because I was wrong - focused on the idea that the linkage apparently drawn by the Premier was based on faulty information from various briefings he may have received. It fits with my overall interpretation that, based on what's in the public domain, this whole thing looked like a massive over-reaction on someone's part.
That said, let me make at least this much clear: the Premier's reaction, while full of his customary hyperbole, was entirely what I would have expected given the information he seems to have received. If I thought that there was a remote chance some gigantic rocket might possibly crash into the Hibernia rig, I'd be making a huge issue about it publicly, in addition to phoning anyone who could do something about it and making sure that there was no threat to life in the event the launch went ahead.
Full marks go to Premier Williams.
As I noted in "Massive Correction" someone else who was at the Premier's scrum put the whole thing in context for me. I can see where the issue came from - it was a huge stretch to even ask the question in this context - and the Premier's reply, as I have it, didn't draw a direct link.
There are still some lingering questions in my mind on this matter, despite the fact most news media have moved on to other things.
The offshore production platforms would certainly make my list of national strategic assets for several reasons. They certainly are major assets for the operators and I take it as a matter of course that the operators monitor potential threats to their property.
Aside from the economic implications of a complete shutdown of offshore production for any length of time, some other agencies like Coast Guard, National Defence, Transport Canada, Environment Canada and some provincial government departments could be called on to respond to any disaster like an impact on the platforms or in assisting in the evacuation.
On a number of levels, this Titan booster issue highlights the importance of emergency preparedness and the need for effective communication and co-ordinated action by public and private sector organizations. I am not saying this did not occur appropriately - sometimes excrement occurs - but the wider lessons/implications of this incident should not be lost.
In that context, though, I am still wondering:
1. When did one of the key players (operators, federal government, CNOPB, provincial government) become aware of this launch as a potential threat to the production platforms?
2. When did the first one who noticed alert the others, all of whom have parts to play?
3. What, if any, mitigation action was taken before ordering the evacuation of the platforms and the relocation of the semi-submersible platform? For example, if ExxonMobil spotted it, I suspect a call from their head office to Washington would have generated more than enough of a response given:
a. the economic value of the assets to US-owned companies;
b. the strategic value of oil to the US economy in the current world economy; and,
c. the fact that both the President and Vice-President are generally familiar with the oil business.
4. Who ordered the evacuation, or depopulation as it has been euphemistically called?
5. On what basis was the evac ordered?
6. Did Ottawa take action before or after the call from Danny Williams or was it more or less simultaneous?
7. Where exactly were the offshore platforms in relation to the anticipated debris zone? To my mind, this is a crucial issue to determine the validity of the evacuation order. Since rocket launches from Florida are not new, this contingency may have already been considered. Maybe it is a completely unique event.
These are just questions. Honestly, I don't know the answers nor do I presume to know them. I am just tossing them out there for consideration.
Incidentally, this incident has been described by some national media as a "test" launch. Wherever they are getting this from, it is wrong.
This is a routine event in every respect, except for the apparent implications for Hibernia and Terra Nova.
As I have said before, VOCM is a news outlet than can describe a situation accurately in as few words as possible. Sometimes, though, interpretations can go astray or the few words chosen can lead people like me to make the wrong conclusion.
Here's the bit in question: "Meantime, Premier Williams says the incident drives home the need for a missile defence system. He is a strong backer of the part that Happy Valley-Goose Bay can play in such a system."
When I read that, I had a hard time figuring how anyone could link these two things together. My post - since deleted because I was wrong - focused on the idea that the linkage apparently drawn by the Premier was based on faulty information from various briefings he may have received. It fits with my overall interpretation that, based on what's in the public domain, this whole thing looked like a massive over-reaction on someone's part.
That said, let me make at least this much clear: the Premier's reaction, while full of his customary hyperbole, was entirely what I would have expected given the information he seems to have received. If I thought that there was a remote chance some gigantic rocket might possibly crash into the Hibernia rig, I'd be making a huge issue about it publicly, in addition to phoning anyone who could do something about it and making sure that there was no threat to life in the event the launch went ahead.
Full marks go to Premier Williams.
As I noted in "Massive Correction" someone else who was at the Premier's scrum put the whole thing in context for me. I can see where the issue came from - it was a huge stretch to even ask the question in this context - and the Premier's reply, as I have it, didn't draw a direct link.
There are still some lingering questions in my mind on this matter, despite the fact most news media have moved on to other things.
The offshore production platforms would certainly make my list of national strategic assets for several reasons. They certainly are major assets for the operators and I take it as a matter of course that the operators monitor potential threats to their property.
Aside from the economic implications of a complete shutdown of offshore production for any length of time, some other agencies like Coast Guard, National Defence, Transport Canada, Environment Canada and some provincial government departments could be called on to respond to any disaster like an impact on the platforms or in assisting in the evacuation.
On a number of levels, this Titan booster issue highlights the importance of emergency preparedness and the need for effective communication and co-ordinated action by public and private sector organizations. I am not saying this did not occur appropriately - sometimes excrement occurs - but the wider lessons/implications of this incident should not be lost.
In that context, though, I am still wondering:
1. When did one of the key players (operators, federal government, CNOPB, provincial government) become aware of this launch as a potential threat to the production platforms?
2. When did the first one who noticed alert the others, all of whom have parts to play?
3. What, if any, mitigation action was taken before ordering the evacuation of the platforms and the relocation of the semi-submersible platform? For example, if ExxonMobil spotted it, I suspect a call from their head office to Washington would have generated more than enough of a response given:
a. the economic value of the assets to US-owned companies;
b. the strategic value of oil to the US economy in the current world economy; and,
c. the fact that both the President and Vice-President are generally familiar with the oil business.
4. Who ordered the evacuation, or depopulation as it has been euphemistically called?
5. On what basis was the evac ordered?
6. Did Ottawa take action before or after the call from Danny Williams or was it more or less simultaneous?
7. Where exactly were the offshore platforms in relation to the anticipated debris zone? To my mind, this is a crucial issue to determine the validity of the evacuation order. Since rocket launches from Florida are not new, this contingency may have already been considered. Maybe it is a completely unique event.
These are just questions. Honestly, I don't know the answers nor do I presume to know them. I am just tossing them out there for consideration.
Incidentally, this incident has been described by some national media as a "test" launch. Wherever they are getting this from, it is wrong.
This is a routine event in every respect, except for the apparent implications for Hibernia and Terra Nova.
Massive Correction
In the post "Speaking of badly briefed" I made some comments on the Premier and his scrum yesterday flowing from a VOCM story this morning.
Based on new information from someone who was there and whose information I regard as accurate and factual I know want to make a massive, unequivocal correction, retracting my comments or any implication that the Premier had in any way linked the Titan booster to ballistic missile defence.
I have it on an authority I trust that the Premier made no link whatsoever between the two.
In response to a reporter's question on how this issue might affect the prospect of a ballistic missile defence installation at Goose Bay, the Premier repeated his support for the X Band radar at Goose Bay, as he would be expected to do.
It is completely erroneous to link the issue of BMD and the Titan booster issue. I withdraw any remarks I made on that subject without reservation or qualification as they relate to the Premier. No inference should be drawn from my remarks in the previous post as they were wrong.
In fact, I am going back and deleting it.
Based on new information from someone who was there and whose information I regard as accurate and factual I know want to make a massive, unequivocal correction, retracting my comments or any implication that the Premier had in any way linked the Titan booster to ballistic missile defence.
I have it on an authority I trust that the Premier made no link whatsoever between the two.
In response to a reporter's question on how this issue might affect the prospect of a ballistic missile defence installation at Goose Bay, the Premier repeated his support for the X Band radar at Goose Bay, as he would be expected to do.
It is completely erroneous to link the issue of BMD and the Titan booster issue. I withdraw any remarks I made on that subject without reservation or qualification as they relate to the Premier. No inference should be drawn from my remarks in the previous post as they were wrong.
In fact, I am going back and deleting it.
You read it here, first - the Space version - revised
As I told you yesterday, "Given the history of Titan 4B boosters, the repeated rescheduling of this mission and that the system is due to be phased out, I'd suspect the Americans are dealing with some mechanical issues."
As VOCM is reporting: "Meantime, the U.S. Air Force Space Command at Cape Canaveral says the launch was postponed because of mechanical problems with ground support equipment."
Go the US Air Force Space Command webpage and you'll see the schedule for launches at Canaveral. NROL-16 is still listed but with the launch date being "no earlier than 11 April 05".
In other coverage, the Canadian Press story is running in various forms in all the major newspapers. The Post is checking to see if Jean Brault mentioned anything about it in his explosive testimony before committing to coverage. Explosive testimony. Explosive missile. Do the math.
CBC's national has a script story and a video story [<--requires Real Player] by our own Chris O'Neill-Yates. (Psst Chris: the launch video you used is a submarine launched missile not a Titan)
As VOCM is reporting: "Meantime, the U.S. Air Force Space Command at Cape Canaveral says the launch was postponed because of mechanical problems with ground support equipment."
Go the US Air Force Space Command webpage and you'll see the schedule for launches at Canaveral. NROL-16 is still listed but with the launch date being "no earlier than 11 April 05".
In other coverage, the Canadian Press story is running in various forms in all the major newspapers. The Post is checking to see if Jean Brault mentioned anything about it in his explosive testimony before committing to coverage. Explosive testimony. Explosive missile. Do the math.
CBC's national has a script story and a video story [<--requires Real Player] by our own Chris O'Neill-Yates. (Psst Chris: the launch video you used is a submarine launched missile not a Titan)
07 April 2005
Re-entry debris footprints
It seems that a number of government officials are holding to their concern about the prospect that the Titan 4B booster scheduled to carry a classified US NRO payload into orbit from Florida will hit the "massive" Hibernia platform.
To see if we can help allay their almost phallicly-based concerns, here's some added information on the footprint left by falling space debris.
The Titan 4B is a two stage system. That means the payload is placed in orbit after it separates from a second stage that has carried it into space. The first stage and side-mounted boosters will have burned out and fallen back to Earth shortly after the launch.
While the Titan 4B may be a 10, 000 pound system fully loaded, the second stage will be returning to Earth the farthest of all debris from the launch point, will have broken up on reentry to Earth's atmosphere and will therefore consist of smaller bits and pieces than when it was fully assembled.
In the case of the system on the pad at Canaveral for the B-30 launch, there is no second stage. It's a 403B version. Therefore, the bulk of the debris will be even closer to the launch point in Florida.
That said, I draw attention to a description of a "debris footprint" from the FAQ at this site, kept up by the Center for Orbital and Reentry Debris Studies.
In particular pay attention to this paragraph:
"The footprint width is generally determined by the effects of wind on the falling debris objects, with heavy objects affected less, and lightest the most. The width of the footprint may also be affected by the breakup process itself. For example, if the object should explode during reentry, fragments will be spread out across the footprint. A footprint width of perhaps 20-40 km is typical, with the most pronounced effects near the heel of the footprint."
If you look at the nice little graphic on that site you will see a big red area on the map representing the surface area where debris may fall.
Until someone shows me the debris footprint for this particular launch, I am going to go out on a limb and say that the Hibernia and Terra Nova rigs were 15 miles outside the red zone representing the most like region of impact for all the bits and pieces of this Titan 4(03)B.
The odds of any bits striking these platforms was small.
And for the record, I give the Premier some slack when he said something about Americans being concerned about seals but not about missiles dropping on peoples' heads. He was a bit concerned, likely based on a poor briefing. Since he loves drama and hyperbole in equal measures, he could come up with a statement that is as accurate as the one uttered by a future Premier when he talked of turbot hanging on by their fingernails.
Fish don't have fingers.
To see if we can help allay their almost phallicly-based concerns, here's some added information on the footprint left by falling space debris.
The Titan 4B is a two stage system. That means the payload is placed in orbit after it separates from a second stage that has carried it into space. The first stage and side-mounted boosters will have burned out and fallen back to Earth shortly after the launch.
While the Titan 4B may be a 10, 000 pound system fully loaded, the second stage will be returning to Earth the farthest of all debris from the launch point, will have broken up on reentry to Earth's atmosphere and will therefore consist of smaller bits and pieces than when it was fully assembled.
In the case of the system on the pad at Canaveral for the B-30 launch, there is no second stage. It's a 403B version. Therefore, the bulk of the debris will be even closer to the launch point in Florida.
That said, I draw attention to a description of a "debris footprint" from the FAQ at this site, kept up by the Center for Orbital and Reentry Debris Studies.
In particular pay attention to this paragraph:
"The footprint width is generally determined by the effects of wind on the falling debris objects, with heavy objects affected less, and lightest the most. The width of the footprint may also be affected by the breakup process itself. For example, if the object should explode during reentry, fragments will be spread out across the footprint. A footprint width of perhaps 20-40 km is typical, with the most pronounced effects near the heel of the footprint."
If you look at the nice little graphic on that site you will see a big red area on the map representing the surface area where debris may fall.
Until someone shows me the debris footprint for this particular launch, I am going to go out on a limb and say that the Hibernia and Terra Nova rigs were 15 miles outside the red zone representing the most like region of impact for all the bits and pieces of this Titan 4(03)B.
The odds of any bits striking these platforms was small.
And for the record, I give the Premier some slack when he said something about Americans being concerned about seals but not about missiles dropping on peoples' heads. He was a bit concerned, likely based on a poor briefing. Since he loves drama and hyperbole in equal measures, he could come up with a statement that is as accurate as the one uttered by a future Premier when he talked of turbot hanging on by their fingernails.
Fish don't have fingers.
Look to the skys!
A bizarre afternoon in Newfoundland and Labrador, what with the Premier calling a hasty news conference to talk about American missiles falling from the sky and coming close to the "massive" Hibernia platform. Such was the panic that there was a plan to evacuate the Hibernia platform and the Terra Nova FPSO and tow another semi-submersible rig out of the potential impact area.
Well, here's what it was really all about.
- This launch has been scheduled for some time, according to both the Kennedy Centre website and other sites on the net that track missile launches globally. One site reports this payload was originally scheduled for a launch in 2001 at Vandenberg air force base in California. The mission was subsequently moved to Canaveral. It has been scheduled and rescheduled at least three times since late March owing to problems reportedly with the payload or with ground equipment.
- The mission, labeled B-30, is a launch by the United States Air Force of a classified payload labeled NROL-16 for the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) , using a Titan 4B booster from Cape Canaveral, Florida. In plain English, it's a "spy" satellite, although I dislike that term for a variety of reasons. Here's a link with some speculation on the payload and other details. Here's another link with even more detail on the possible payload, a radar imaging satellite similar to several launched in the late 1990s and 2000.
- This is one of the last launches for the Titan 4B. It is getting old and costly. In fact some of the delays in this mission have been due to equipment problems related to the booster. Here's a piece from the roll-out last fall.
- These satellites are usually placed in very specific orbits and together with others provide complete global coverage. There is some room to adjust launch trajectories but I'd guess not a heck of a lot.
- This is nothing new. Boosters and other missile bits have been falling into the sea off Newfoundland for as long as there have been missiles launched from Florida. In the 1980s two US Navy range telemetry ships stopped in port. I still have pictures of the visit of USNS Range Sentinel.
- I'd venture there have been other launches in the general direction of the Hibernia platform before on a similar trajectory.
- Each of these launches involves the booster burning up on re-entry although pieces of the booster will return to Earth. To estimate the chances of having something hit Hibernia, do the following: Stand on top of the Fortis Building. Using a penny, hit the postage stamp I have laid in the middle of Water Street. Keep your eyes closed throughout.
- As part of the normal planning for an event like this, the launching agency would prepare a footprint giving an anticipated zone in which debris will fall. This is shown as an ellipse on a map and several larger ellipses around it representing areas where it is less likely but possible that debris may strike.
Each of these zones would be tens of kilometres wide.
The big issue here is where within that footprint map the Hibernia rig fell.
- In Ottawa, this launch would have been part of the normal intelligence briefings at DND for senior officers and officials and senior ministers would have been briefed as well. PCO has a section that would have noticed it and it appears cabinet was actually briefed today.
- It would be normal for senior ministers (DND and Public Security) as well as senior officials to contact their US counterparts to express concern at the proximity to the oilfields. Their ability to influence things would be minor in dealing with a sensitive payload like this unless there was plenty of room to pick a different trajectory.
- While it is possible the US planners missed the Hibernia rig in their planning, I'd doubt it very much for a whole bunch of reasons. Danny Williams suggestion that they goofed is a typical bit of Williams fantasy.
- The simple fact is that the rig is massive only if you are one person standing right next to it. From 180 miles in space across a vast sea it is a fixed spot. The chances of hitting the rig or any other man-made object are slim. The launch was scheduled for about 2230 EDT (0000 NDT) for a reason: less air traffic. The Americans also issue routine warnings to mariners to avoid specific areas as a normal precaution.
- The problem in assessing Danny Williams' comments about 15 miles is that we have no idea who briefed him and what they told him. Reporters should take his comments with a bag of salt. It appears from some of his comments that the Premier was briefed by officials and did not get information from senior federal officials directly.
Is the rig 15 miles outside the high probability impact zone? Well, that zone would be miles wide. My guess is that some official didn't get complete information and if they did, they didn't interpret it correctly. That led to a legitimate level of anxiety on the Premier's part and the subsequent news conference.
Basically, the Newfoundland government has no internal capability to assess anything defence related. They are at the mercy of a bunch of factors, including a complete lack of experience in dealing with this sort of issue. Given that everyone, officials and politicians are well removed from the major analysis sites in Ottawa, the chance for misunderstanding and miscommunication are magnified.
I could recount stories of Davis Inlet and the first Gulf War but that is for another time. This is not about which party is in power; it is about a lack of expertise within the provincial government.
- The American delay, described as being either for 48 hours or indefinitely depending on who is reporting it, likely has nothing to do with Canadian concerns. Given the history of Titan 4B boosters, the repeated rescheduling of this mission and that the system is due to be phased out, I'd suspect the Americans are dealing with some mechanical issues.
Well, here's what it was really all about.
- This launch has been scheduled for some time, according to both the Kennedy Centre website and other sites on the net that track missile launches globally. One site reports this payload was originally scheduled for a launch in 2001 at Vandenberg air force base in California. The mission was subsequently moved to Canaveral. It has been scheduled and rescheduled at least three times since late March owing to problems reportedly with the payload or with ground equipment.
- The mission, labeled B-30, is a launch by the United States Air Force of a classified payload labeled NROL-16 for the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) , using a Titan 4B booster from Cape Canaveral, Florida. In plain English, it's a "spy" satellite, although I dislike that term for a variety of reasons. Here's a link with some speculation on the payload and other details. Here's another link with even more detail on the possible payload, a radar imaging satellite similar to several launched in the late 1990s and 2000.
- This is one of the last launches for the Titan 4B. It is getting old and costly. In fact some of the delays in this mission have been due to equipment problems related to the booster. Here's a piece from the roll-out last fall.
- These satellites are usually placed in very specific orbits and together with others provide complete global coverage. There is some room to adjust launch trajectories but I'd guess not a heck of a lot.
- This is nothing new. Boosters and other missile bits have been falling into the sea off Newfoundland for as long as there have been missiles launched from Florida. In the 1980s two US Navy range telemetry ships stopped in port. I still have pictures of the visit of USNS Range Sentinel.
- I'd venture there have been other launches in the general direction of the Hibernia platform before on a similar trajectory.
- Each of these launches involves the booster burning up on re-entry although pieces of the booster will return to Earth. To estimate the chances of having something hit Hibernia, do the following: Stand on top of the Fortis Building. Using a penny, hit the postage stamp I have laid in the middle of Water Street. Keep your eyes closed throughout.
- As part of the normal planning for an event like this, the launching agency would prepare a footprint giving an anticipated zone in which debris will fall. This is shown as an ellipse on a map and several larger ellipses around it representing areas where it is less likely but possible that debris may strike.
Each of these zones would be tens of kilometres wide.
The big issue here is where within that footprint map the Hibernia rig fell.
- In Ottawa, this launch would have been part of the normal intelligence briefings at DND for senior officers and officials and senior ministers would have been briefed as well. PCO has a section that would have noticed it and it appears cabinet was actually briefed today.
- It would be normal for senior ministers (DND and Public Security) as well as senior officials to contact their US counterparts to express concern at the proximity to the oilfields. Their ability to influence things would be minor in dealing with a sensitive payload like this unless there was plenty of room to pick a different trajectory.
- While it is possible the US planners missed the Hibernia rig in their planning, I'd doubt it very much for a whole bunch of reasons. Danny Williams suggestion that they goofed is a typical bit of Williams fantasy.
- The simple fact is that the rig is massive only if you are one person standing right next to it. From 180 miles in space across a vast sea it is a fixed spot. The chances of hitting the rig or any other man-made object are slim. The launch was scheduled for about 2230 EDT (0000 NDT) for a reason: less air traffic. The Americans also issue routine warnings to mariners to avoid specific areas as a normal precaution.
- The problem in assessing Danny Williams' comments about 15 miles is that we have no idea who briefed him and what they told him. Reporters should take his comments with a bag of salt. It appears from some of his comments that the Premier was briefed by officials and did not get information from senior federal officials directly.
Is the rig 15 miles outside the high probability impact zone? Well, that zone would be miles wide. My guess is that some official didn't get complete information and if they did, they didn't interpret it correctly. That led to a legitimate level of anxiety on the Premier's part and the subsequent news conference.
Basically, the Newfoundland government has no internal capability to assess anything defence related. They are at the mercy of a bunch of factors, including a complete lack of experience in dealing with this sort of issue. Given that everyone, officials and politicians are well removed from the major analysis sites in Ottawa, the chance for misunderstanding and miscommunication are magnified.
I could recount stories of Davis Inlet and the first Gulf War but that is for another time. This is not about which party is in power; it is about a lack of expertise within the provincial government.
- The American delay, described as being either for 48 hours or indefinitely depending on who is reporting it, likely has nothing to do with Canadian concerns. Given the history of Titan 4B boosters, the repeated rescheduling of this mission and that the system is due to be phased out, I'd suspect the Americans are dealing with some mechanical issues.
Explosive Ordnance Disposal
EOD.
Paul Wells has been waging a valiant, if seemingly futile campaign to diffuse the Gomery testimony story, criticize the media use of the word "explosive" when discussing it, and drag the whole discussion onto something less prurient. I use the term advisedly, given that some people seem to derive a strange fetishistic state of arousal these days when the word Gomery is used. Use your imaginations.
So today he just links to all the media outlets still describing testimony last week before Justice Gomery as being explosive.
Paul makes a valid point, and one apparently not lost on one Stephen Harper. His sound bite for today (left over from yesterday) has been about the need to find a new message for Quebeckers besides corruption or separation. He tosses this one on the table in discussing the prospect the Cons will vote to defeat the government on a Bloc non-confidence motion due next week.
Anyway, those with long memories will chuckle at the idea of Conservatives, progressive or otherwise, presuming to lecture on the need for a new message for Quebec.
Anyway, while Paul is tackling the intellectual road, let's wander over to the one I sometimes travel, namely the low road of sarcasm and ridicule.
What kind of explosive is this Gomery testimony, one might inquire of the scribblers busily recycling their Gomery phrases for outlets like the Sun chain, the Globe and even Reuters.
There a nuclear explosions that kill everything and leave the landscape uninhabitable for centuries. Personally, I'd suggest Paul's upcoming essay is going to lean to the idea that the whole Gomery tesitmony discussion is of the nookyoolur explosion kind. Self-frickin immolation. And without the black humour of Dr. Strangelove.
There are plain old high explosives which kill everything within a certain radius from the blast and injure dozens more. Possibility. I could buy that interpretation potentially.
There is a fuel-air explosion, in which gas fumes seep into every crack and then get ignited. Big bang. Lots of flame and much scorching.
This should not be confused with napalm, which is one of the genuinely nastiest kinds of explosions there is. Opposition types might like Gomery to be napalm dropped on the bastions of the Liberal Party. Tends to produce something called crispy critters.
But being a father of two children both of whom were breast-fed, the only word I viscerally associate with "explosive" is a bowel movement.
I still remember the look on my father's face as he held his first grandchild just as Number One Son of Number One Son did what nature intended. Big noise. Distressing motion inside the diaper and the house. Foul odor. Severe look of concern on Grandpa, who had little experience with these things and thought something truly hideous was about to occur. But it was quickly wiped up and life went on. The grown-ups went back to talking about something they needed to worry about while other processes worked as they should.
Far be it from me to drag this little metaphor all the way into the depths to which one could go. Heck it may be a totally unworkable metaphor. Suffice to say that political dialogue nationally has sunk to what amounts to little more than the results of my son's feasting. Big noise. Distressing motions in the House. Really bad smell. Look of concern.
But ultimately, this matter will wind up in a bin somewhere.
And while we are paying attention to the noise, some major issues we should be worried about - like the ones Paul will likely raise - are going unattended.
If the guys in Ottawa are dumb enough to blunder into an election over this load, I'd wager that the electorate will reward them appropriately.
For the love of heaven and the country, will some politician in Ottawa please start talking about major national issues?
Let the courts and police and the Gomery Inquisition do their jobs.
Maybe it's the fear of the diaper pail that has Mr. Harper changing his tune today.
Or maybe Paul's pleadings are finally penetrating someone's skull.
Paul Wells has been waging a valiant, if seemingly futile campaign to diffuse the Gomery testimony story, criticize the media use of the word "explosive" when discussing it, and drag the whole discussion onto something less prurient. I use the term advisedly, given that some people seem to derive a strange fetishistic state of arousal these days when the word Gomery is used. Use your imaginations.
So today he just links to all the media outlets still describing testimony last week before Justice Gomery as being explosive.
Paul makes a valid point, and one apparently not lost on one Stephen Harper. His sound bite for today (left over from yesterday) has been about the need to find a new message for Quebeckers besides corruption or separation. He tosses this one on the table in discussing the prospect the Cons will vote to defeat the government on a Bloc non-confidence motion due next week.
Anyway, those with long memories will chuckle at the idea of Conservatives, progressive or otherwise, presuming to lecture on the need for a new message for Quebec.
Anyway, while Paul is tackling the intellectual road, let's wander over to the one I sometimes travel, namely the low road of sarcasm and ridicule.
What kind of explosive is this Gomery testimony, one might inquire of the scribblers busily recycling their Gomery phrases for outlets like the Sun chain, the Globe and even Reuters.
There a nuclear explosions that kill everything and leave the landscape uninhabitable for centuries. Personally, I'd suggest Paul's upcoming essay is going to lean to the idea that the whole Gomery tesitmony discussion is of the nookyoolur explosion kind. Self-frickin immolation. And without the black humour of Dr. Strangelove.
There are plain old high explosives which kill everything within a certain radius from the blast and injure dozens more. Possibility. I could buy that interpretation potentially.
There is a fuel-air explosion, in which gas fumes seep into every crack and then get ignited. Big bang. Lots of flame and much scorching.
This should not be confused with napalm, which is one of the genuinely nastiest kinds of explosions there is. Opposition types might like Gomery to be napalm dropped on the bastions of the Liberal Party. Tends to produce something called crispy critters.
But being a father of two children both of whom were breast-fed, the only word I viscerally associate with "explosive" is a bowel movement.
I still remember the look on my father's face as he held his first grandchild just as Number One Son of Number One Son did what nature intended. Big noise. Distressing motion inside the diaper and the house. Foul odor. Severe look of concern on Grandpa, who had little experience with these things and thought something truly hideous was about to occur. But it was quickly wiped up and life went on. The grown-ups went back to talking about something they needed to worry about while other processes worked as they should.
Far be it from me to drag this little metaphor all the way into the depths to which one could go. Heck it may be a totally unworkable metaphor. Suffice to say that political dialogue nationally has sunk to what amounts to little more than the results of my son's feasting. Big noise. Distressing motions in the House. Really bad smell. Look of concern.
But ultimately, this matter will wind up in a bin somewhere.
And while we are paying attention to the noise, some major issues we should be worried about - like the ones Paul will likely raise - are going unattended.
If the guys in Ottawa are dumb enough to blunder into an election over this load, I'd wager that the electorate will reward them appropriately.
For the love of heaven and the country, will some politician in Ottawa please start talking about major national issues?
Let the courts and police and the Gomery Inquisition do their jobs.
Maybe it's the fear of the diaper pail that has Mr. Harper changing his tune today.
Or maybe Paul's pleadings are finally penetrating someone's skull.
Who'd waste the ammo?
Bullets are expensive these days.
That's why this little news story looks more like headline grabbing sensationalism than a serious decision taken based on a thorough threat assessment.
With the exception of Martin Sheen, who did a little ad for Paul Watson's crowd, pretty well every "celebrity" I have seen working the PETA/IFAW circuit lately has been a has-been more likely to turn up on some abysmal cable-tv reality show than in a movie anyone has paid money to see.
Like Elizabeth Berkley. Without exception, the movies listed on her IMDB entry are ones I have never seen and will never see because, to put it bluntly, they suck. Liz may be busier than the guy who played Screech, but I bet he has a steady paycheque that doesn't involve boring audiences to death.
As for Anna Nicole Smith from the link above, I would have pitched the story as an environmental one. Out of fear that a stray bullet at the ice flows would release industrial quantities of silicone, Anna is staying away so she doesn't harm the cuddly baby seals.
More plausible, for one thing.
I am starting to think that the people who book acts for Mile One use the same agency that finds celebs for Paul Watson.
Look guys, Frank Gorshin is still available.
As is Charles Napier.
ditto Expendible Crewman Number 3 from "Space Seed".
And Tiffani Thiessen.
Oh wait.
Maybe not: check out the picture gallery. Is that a real fur barely covering her ample and perchance artificially enhanced assets?
At least Tiff is a "Saved by the bell" alumna with her own website.
That's why this little news story looks more like headline grabbing sensationalism than a serious decision taken based on a thorough threat assessment.
With the exception of Martin Sheen, who did a little ad for Paul Watson's crowd, pretty well every "celebrity" I have seen working the PETA/IFAW circuit lately has been a has-been more likely to turn up on some abysmal cable-tv reality show than in a movie anyone has paid money to see.
Like Elizabeth Berkley. Without exception, the movies listed on her IMDB entry are ones I have never seen and will never see because, to put it bluntly, they suck. Liz may be busier than the guy who played Screech, but I bet he has a steady paycheque that doesn't involve boring audiences to death.
As for Anna Nicole Smith from the link above, I would have pitched the story as an environmental one. Out of fear that a stray bullet at the ice flows would release industrial quantities of silicone, Anna is staying away so she doesn't harm the cuddly baby seals.
More plausible, for one thing.
I am starting to think that the people who book acts for Mile One use the same agency that finds celebs for Paul Watson.
Look guys, Frank Gorshin is still available.
As is Charles Napier.
ditto Expendible Crewman Number 3 from "Space Seed".
And Tiffani Thiessen.
Oh wait.
Maybe not: check out the picture gallery. Is that a real fur barely covering her ample and perchance artificially enhanced assets?
At least Tiff is a "Saved by the bell" alumna with her own website.
Blarney and buds threaten province's future
Blarney the Dinosaur from Up the Shore is at it again, according to a VOCM story posted this morning. This little news outlet deserves an award for saying the most with the least number of words:
"St. John's South-Mount Pearl MP Loyola Hearn [known to many as Blarney] says the Liberal government is using the longest possible route to approve the Atlantic Accord. [Blarney] Hearn suggested it would take only minutes to rework the accord."
Ok.
Not to really Harp-er on this but the Atlantic Accord was signed and approved in the 1980s, Blarney. I know it was back in the Cretaceous period of your political career, Blarney, but surely you remembered bobbing up and down in your seat to vote for that piece of paper Brian Peckford (your boss at the time) was waving around?
What is currently in front of the Commons is a budget-related bill authorizing the federal government to hand over cash to this province under certain conditions. It is closely related to most of the other provisions of Bill C-43. Except for the ones upsetting Blarney and his friends.
And that's where Blarney's comments start to look like what they are: coprolites.
The federal government has already agreed to drop the Kyoto provisions of Bill C-43 that have Blarney and his carbon dioxide exhaling pals emitting higher than usual levels of both CO2 and fossilized fecal matter.
So what happened when the "crisis" looked like it was about to be solved?
Blarney and his buds decided that basking in the warmth of the media sun was worth more to Opposition than actually doing the job they get paid to do. Count the number of mentions of Conservative politicians this weekend versus say when they had their big policy convention.
Except for Peter Mackay's hysterically funny comments on betrayal, the whole weekend was like a policy Ice Age - no idea worth talking about could survive the "No Controversy" chill from Harper and his cohorts.
So people fell asleep.
Only to be re-awakened by one of the most contrived "crises" since the last "conspiracy" spotted by our Premier.
And every day Blarney and his buds shag around with this issue, they are threatening the province's financial future.
If they actually had anything of merit to talk about, they would be saying it.
That they spend all their time pointing fingers at other people should be a big clue as to what Blarney and his gang are really saying not about the Libs but about themselves.
"St. John's South-Mount Pearl MP Loyola Hearn [known to many as Blarney] says the Liberal government is using the longest possible route to approve the Atlantic Accord. [Blarney] Hearn suggested it would take only minutes to rework the accord."
Ok.
Not to really Harp-er on this but the Atlantic Accord was signed and approved in the 1980s, Blarney. I know it was back in the Cretaceous period of your political career, Blarney, but surely you remembered bobbing up and down in your seat to vote for that piece of paper Brian Peckford (your boss at the time) was waving around?
What is currently in front of the Commons is a budget-related bill authorizing the federal government to hand over cash to this province under certain conditions. It is closely related to most of the other provisions of Bill C-43. Except for the ones upsetting Blarney and his friends.
And that's where Blarney's comments start to look like what they are: coprolites.
The federal government has already agreed to drop the Kyoto provisions of Bill C-43 that have Blarney and his carbon dioxide exhaling pals emitting higher than usual levels of both CO2 and fossilized fecal matter.
So what happened when the "crisis" looked like it was about to be solved?
Blarney and his buds decided that basking in the warmth of the media sun was worth more to Opposition than actually doing the job they get paid to do. Count the number of mentions of Conservative politicians this weekend versus say when they had their big policy convention.
Except for Peter Mackay's hysterically funny comments on betrayal, the whole weekend was like a policy Ice Age - no idea worth talking about could survive the "No Controversy" chill from Harper and his cohorts.
So people fell asleep.
Only to be re-awakened by one of the most contrived "crises" since the last "conspiracy" spotted by our Premier.
And every day Blarney and his buds shag around with this issue, they are threatening the province's financial future.
If they actually had anything of merit to talk about, they would be saying it.
That they spend all their time pointing fingers at other people should be a big clue as to what Blarney and his gang are really saying not about the Libs but about themselves.
06 April 2005
Talking like an oil techie
Here are some links to sites that describe different types of crude oil.
First, we have Platt's Oil Guide which gives a general description of crude types from around the globe. Note especially the API gravity for each type. The bigger the number, the lighter the crude and hence the ease with which it can be refined into a wide range of consumer products.
Second, here is a link to Hibernia and Terra Nova crude specifications. Go back and compare the stuff from these wells with other crude types.
First, we have Platt's Oil Guide which gives a general description of crude types from around the globe. Note especially the API gravity for each type. The bigger the number, the lighter the crude and hence the ease with which it can be refined into a wide range of consumer products.
Second, here is a link to Hibernia and Terra Nova crude specifications. Go back and compare the stuff from these wells with other crude types.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)